A 20-year-old asylum-seeker from San Francisco now faces deportation following a transfer of his case to U.S. Immigration Court Judge Ravit Halperin in San Bernardino County, who is known for stricter rulings on asylum applications.
This individual, who has requested anonymity, was previously in asylum proceedings overseen by San Francisco Immigration Court Judge Jeremiah Johnson, who granted almost 89 percent of cases between fiscal years 2019 and 2023.
In stark contrast, Judge Halperin has denied 90 percent of asylum cases in her tenure, a trend that raises concern among immigration attorneys.
The alarming shift occurred after the asylum-seeker arrived for a routine hearing on May 27, only to find that a federal attorney had moved to dismiss his case.
These motions are part of a tactic utilized by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) under the administration of President Donald Trump, aiming to expedite the deportation of asylum-seekers.
A dismissal of an asylum case leaves individuals without the legal protections that come with pending asylum proceedings, placing them in a precarious position.
During the initial hearing, Judge Johnson denied the dismissal request, thus securing the asylum-seeker’s protection while his case was being evaluated.
However, following the hearing, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrested the asylum-seeker and detained him despite the judge’s ruling.
This tactic has reportedly become increasingly common, with ICE agents frequently apprehending asylum-seekers immediately post-hearings in San Francisco.
After his arrest, the asylum-seeker was detained at the Golden State Annex, located approximately 30 miles north of Bakersfield.
Subsequently, his case was moved to the Adelanto Immigration Court, where Judge Halperin was presiding over cases.
This relocation allowed the DHS to file the same motion for dismissal that Judge Johnson had already denied, but this time in front of a more accommodating judge.
On June 11, when the asylum-seeker appeared before Judge Halperin, the DHS attorney made the same dismissal request, which the judge accepted.
This ruling effectively overruled the decision made by Judge Johnson in San Francisco, putting the asylum-seeker at risk for deportation.
Kaur, the asylum-seeker’s attorney, expressed confusion over the change in ruling as no new circumstances had arisen in her client’s case.
The asylum-seeker entered the United States in January of 2024 and filed for asylum in May, claiming protection based on his political activism with a Sikh nationalist party in India.
Asylum approval rates can vary dramatically across different states and immigration courts.
For instance, the San Francisco immigration court showcases several judges with approval rates exceeding 90 percent, while only one judge in Adelanto has granted asylum in more than half of the cases during recent years.
The stark differences in approval rates can be influenced by various factors, such as access to legal representation.
In Sacramento, Judge Halperin oversaw cases where 81 percent of asylum-seekers had an attorney, while in San Francisco, that figure reached 97 percent for cases heard by Judge Johnson.
Additionally, the nationality of the applicant can play a significant role in determining outcomes.
The Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) data provides important insight into the approval rates but does not track procedural decisions, such as the increase in motions to dismiss asylum claims.
Immigration attorneys express concerns as federal attorneys are increasingly moving to dismiss cases to expedite deportations.
Recent guidance from the Department of Justice reportedly encourages immigration judges to adopt these motions to dismiss.
In San Francisco itself, judges have not been easily swayed by these motions.
For example, in three separate court hearings on June 10, judges including Johnson rejected similar requests from DHS attorneys.
However, once an asylum-seeker is detained, the current system makes it challenging for them to return to court in San Francisco.
With at least ten people, including Kaur’s client, facing arrest post-hearing, none of California’s six detention facilities are situated near San Francisco.
Milli Atkinson, an immigration specialist associated with the Bar Association of San Francisco, noted the troubling pattern wherein the department appears to exploit the legal system to sidestep original judges and disregard prior rulings by San Francisco judges.
Kaur confirmed that her client is appealing the dismissal of his asylum case.
As of the latest update, he remains in detention, reflecting the ongoing challenges faced by many asylum-seekers navigating an increasingly unpredictable immigration landscape.
image source from：missionlocal
