Asylum Seekers Face Vastly Different Outcomes in California Courts

San Francisco judges grant asylum at much higher rates than Los Angeles counterparts under Trump administration policies

Published on Feb. 15, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The fate of thousands of asylum seekers in California often comes down to which judge will determine their case - with a stark difference in outcomes between San Francisco and Los Angeles courts. Data shows San Francisco judges denied just 28.5% of cases from 2020-2025, while Los Angeles judges denied nearly 60% on average, mirroring a similar trend in New York. This disparity highlights the impact of the Trump administration's efforts to drive down asylum grant rates nationwide.

Why it matters

The wide gap in asylum case outcomes between San Francisco and Los Angeles courts underscores the significant role individual judges can play in determining the future of migrants seeking refuge in the U.S. This issue raises questions about the fairness and consistency of the immigration court system, especially as the Trump administration has taken steps to appoint more conservative-leaning judges and remove those perceived as too lenient.

The details

Data compiled by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse shows a stark difference in asylum case outcomes between San Francisco and Los Angeles courts under the Trump administration. From 2020 to late 2025, San Francisco judges denied just 28.5% of cases, while Los Angeles judges denied nearly 60% on average - close to the national average. In the last quarter, nearly 80% of migrants seeking asylum were denied. Judges like Tara Naselow-Nahas and Kevin W. Riley in Los Angeles had denial rates over 90%, while Shira M. Levine in San Francisco granted asylum in 97.9% of her cases until she was fired by the Trump administration.

  • Between 2020 and late 2025, San Francisco judges denied 28.5% of asylum cases on average.
  • In the last quarter, nearly 80% of migrants seeking asylum in the U.S. were denied.
  • Shira M. Levine was appointed to the San Francisco immigration bench in 2021 and granted asylum in 97.9% of her 1,165 cases until she was fired by the Trump administration in September.

The players

Tara Naselow-Nahas

An immigration judge appointed during the Obama administration in November 2009 who had the highest denial rates in California, denying asylum in roughly 91.6% of the 525 cases she handled across two court locations in Los Angeles.

Kevin W. Riley

An immigration judge appointed in the same class as Naselow-Nahas who ranked highest among California judges in denying asylum between 2020 and late 2025, denying more than 99% of asylum seekers in 350 cases in north Los Angeles and Adelanto federal courthouses.

Shira M. Levine

An immigration judge appointed to the San Francisco federal bench in 2021 during the Biden administration, who was the state's most lenient judge in granting asylum, denying just 2.1% of the 1,165 cases she oversaw - until she was fired by the Trump administration in September.

Frank Seminerio

An immigration judge in San Francisco who heard the most cases of any judge in California over the last five years, denying 65.6% of asylum seekers.

Nathan Aina

A former immigration judge in San Francisco who reportedly had the nickname 'quiet assassin' among local lawyers for rejecting almost all asylum claims, denying 94.2% of the cases he heard.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“It's having a real impact. The Trump Administration is doing all kinds of things to drive down the asylum grant rate.”

— Andrew Arthur, Fellow, Center for Immigration Policy and former immigration judge

“It's a mighty big gap between judges. Maybe one judge just gets very meritorious cases, and maybe one judge gets non-meritorious cases. But it is a significant issue.”

— Andrew Arthur, Fellow, Center for Immigration Policy and former immigration judge

What’s next

The federal government can intervene to appeal a judge's ruling to grant asylum, as the 'first adjudicators' of these cases are the immigration judges, not the 'last adjudicators'.

The takeaway

The stark difference in asylum case outcomes between San Francisco and Los Angeles courts highlights the significant impact individual judges can have on the lives of migrants seeking refuge in the U.S., raising concerns about the fairness and consistency of the immigration court system under the Trump administration's efforts to reshape it.