Towards a Multi-Institutional Model of Administration Judge Behavior
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Dissertations Graduate College 12-2016 Who Controls Immigration Judges?: Towards a Multi-Institutional Model of Administration Judge Behavior Mark Richard Beougher Western Michigan University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations Part of the Administrative Law Commons, Immigration Law Commons, International Humanitarian Law Commons, and the Law and Politics Commons Recommended Citation Beougher, Mark Richard, "Who Controls Immigration Judges?: Towards a Multi-Institutional Model of Administration Judge Behavior" (2016). Dissertations. 2492. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations/2492 This Dissertation-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WHO CONTROLS IMMIGRATION JUDGES?: TOWARDS A MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL MODEL OF ADMINISTRATION JUDGE BEHAVIOR by Mark Richard Beougher A dissertation submitted to the Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Political Science Western Michigan University December 2016 Doctoral Committee: Mark Hurwitz, Ph.D. J. Kevin Corder, Ph.D. Ashlyn Kuersten, Ph.D. Robert Howard, Ph.D. WHO CONTROLS IMMIGRATION JUDGES?: TOWARDS A MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL MODEL OF ADMINISTRATION JUDGE BEHAVIOR Mark Richard Beougher, Ph.D. Western Michigan University, 2016 Numerous studies have shown dramatic variations in the rates that immigration judges grant asylum. What these studies have failed to adequately explain as of yet is why? In attempting to understand the behavior of immigration judges in asylum cases, scholars have generally taken one of two approaches, either examining immigration judge behavior through top-down bureaucratic models or with models developed through the study of the judiciary. From these studies we have learned that similarly situated asylum applicants have different chances of success based merely on the ideological leanings of the judge who decides their case. We also have learned that judges respond to top down extraneous pressures by granting more or fewer asylum petitions. What we don’t know is how the individual preferences of immigration judges are affected by extraneous factors. I believe that the primary reason previous studies have been deficient is their failure to adequately consider how immigration judges’ decisions are influenced by their status as administrative law judges who are tasked with making hundreds of verdicts a year. As administrative law judges, immigration judges sit within a web of oversight that is unlike any other judiciary. They have a caseload that is more akin to a street-level bureaucrat than most members of the judiciary. However, as members of the judiciary they are different from the type of agents who are the subject of most top-down studies of bureaucracies. I hypothesize that in order to fully understand the behavior of immigration judges in asylum cases, any model must contain a combination of attitudinal, institutional, legal and exogenous variables which influence immigration judges in their decisions to grant or deny asylum. Recognizing that immigration judges sit within a rather unique context, a multi- institutional approach examining immigration judges as both administrative law judges as well as street level bureaucrats working within a legal context provides the best explanation for why these judges behave so differently. The results confirm a number of previous findings. Immigration judge ideology does influence the rate that they grant asylum. Political, economic and social factors also influence whether immigration judges grant asylum. The results also point to a number of new conclusions that can be drawn about the behavior of immigration judges in particular as well as administrative law judges in general. Like street level bureaucrats, as caseload increases, the influence of individual ideology in the decision process also increases. Moreover, the results reveal that judges with different ideological leanings respond to the same variables differently. Factors that might increase the likelihood that a liberal judge will grant asylum, actually decrease the likelihood that a conservative judge would grant asylum. These results have important policy as well as legal ramifications. Furthermore, they call into question generally held notions of both judicial and bureaucratic behavior and, as such, provide an important contribution to the discipline. © 2016 Mark Richard Beougher ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The first people that I need to thank are my family. My mother who has always shown more faith and confidence in me than I deserve and whose support is the primary reason that I completed my dissertation. You have always been my rock mom. My father, who has been my moral and intellectual compass. My interest in asylum and refugee issues largely comes from watching you work to protect the children of Michigan and Maine for your entire career. I have always hoped to live up to your example. My sister who has been instrumental in me making it this far, academically. Whether it was the help in editing this dissertation (and countless other papers) or letting me crash on your floor, I have known that I can always count on you. My children, Claire and Simon, who inspire me to work to make the world a better place and whose love and affection I have leaned on during the darkest of times. You are my entire world. I also need to thank all of the members of my dissertation committee and in particular my advisor, Mark Hurwitz. Mark, thank you so much for providing the steady encouragement that I needed throughout this too long process. It means a great deal that you never gave up on me. Kevin Corder, I do not know how I would have been able to handle the myriad of statistical and structural issues of this dissertation without your thoughtful and consistent assistance. Robert Howard, I owe two levels of gratitude. First for your work on Administrative Law Judges that inspired the model that I used in this dissertation and second for your willingness to participate on a committee for a graduate student you did not know. Ashlyn Kuersten, thank you so much for all that you have done for me since I first entered the program. Your commitment to teaching and work on social justice issues has been an inspiration to me. I must also thank several people who lead me to explore asylum and refugee issues. Professor James Hathaway, whose class on asylum law first sparked this interest. The Archdiocese of Detroit’s Immigration and Asylum Clinic which gave me my first opportunity to work with people seeking refuge. Zef Pergega, my first client, whose integrity and courage won out in the end. ii Acknowledgements – Continued I would also like to acknowledge that I am completing this dissertation at an extremely dark and terrifying time for immigrants in the United States. I am writing this acknowledgement three days after Donald Trump has been elected as president of the United States. His anti- immigrant rhetoric, promises to deport millions of undocumented residents and plans to deny the protections of asylum to those of the Muslim faith are antithetical to this country’s legal and moral obligations. I decided to write my dissertation on the asylum process because I believed that it is one of the noblest experiments in the history of the modern world. To think that a vast majority of the countries in the world have signed onto an agreement that requires them to provide protection to the neediest who reach their shores is almost incomprehensible in today’s environment. This is an incredible example of the good that can be achieved through global cooperation. Unfortunately, across the world, countries are reneging on this obligation. A growing anti-immigrant wave is rising in the developed world. Rather than be a bastion against this wave, we have decided to bolster its force with the election of Mr. Trump. It is my intent to apply whatever skill and knowledge I have obtained to oppose the efforts of Mr. Trump and the forces of intolerance in the world. Mark Richard Beougher iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................ ii LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... xi LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... xiii CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1 Immigration Judges And Asylum .......................................................................................... 2 Why The Romeike’s Decision Was Such A Surprise ............................................................ 4 How Does One Explain The Behavior Of Judge Burman? ................................................... 6 What Is Behind The Variance In Asylum Grant Rates Between Immigration Judges? ........ 9 Developing A Better Model Of Asylum Adjudication ........................................................ 10 Administrative Law Court Models .....................................................................................