For Alabama’s immigrant detainees, a favorable judge is luck of the draw

For immigrants in Alabama seeking asylum, the path to legal status is often dictated by a roll of the dice. Because Alabama lacks its own immigration court, residents typically find themselves facing proceedings in Louisiana or Atlanta—venues that have long maintained some of the highest denial rates in the nation.

The Geography of Justice

Immigration attorney Ivannoel Dollar notes that legal interpretations can fluctuate significantly between jurisdictions. “One immigration court may have an advantage over another immigration court,” Dollar explained, highlighting the disparities that shape the lives of asylum seekers.

The pressure is particularly high in Georgia. “Atlanta’s always been the hardest non-detained court in the country,” says Alabama-based immigration lawyer John Bell.

High Stakes, High Denials

Data from the University of Syracuse’s TRACreports.org paints a stark picture. Between 2020 and 2025, Atlanta courts denied an average of 83.7% of asylum cases. In Louisiana, the court housed within the Jena detention center denied 82.1% of claims. These figures stand in sharp contrast to regions like San Francisco, where the average denial rate during the same period was 28.6%.

The variance between individual judges is equally profound. In Atlanta, denial rates among judges ranged from 56.7% to 97.7%. Similar volatility exists in Jena, where rates span from 64.9% to 94.6%.

A Shifting Landscape

Under the Trump administration, the Department of Justice has emphasized the hiring of “deportation judges,” often pulling from military backgrounds. The administration has openly described asylum as a “huge loophole,” a stance that led to the firing of multiple judges in San Francisco for what was perceived as a trend of leniency.

Victoria Nelson of the National Immigration Project warns that the trend is shifting toward consistently high denial rates nationwide. She compares the current climate of asylum law to the tragic history of the St. Louis boat, where refugees were denied safe harbor during World War II. Nelson emphasized to 205focus.com that the law leaves immense power in the hands of judges to weigh credibility and determine if an applicant qualifies for protection.

Logistical Hurdles

The road to a hearing is fraught with procedural obstacles. Emma Morley, an attorney representing immigrants in Louisiana, reports that last-minute rescheduling and missing hearing notices have become standard. “Some judges are very strict about what types of documents they want to see, or they have random page limits that you have to comply with,” Morley noted.

Access to counsel remains a massive barrier. According to a TRAC analysis, only 24% of Alabama residents in immigration court had legal representation in 2025, ranking the state 41st in the nation for access to counsel.

Finding a Legal Foothold

Despite the grim statistics—including Alabama recording the highest percentage of immigrant removals of any state as of February—Bell sees a potential glimmer of hope in a recent 11th Circuit ruling. The court ruled against the practice of holding immigrants without bond.

“When Alabama (detains) somebody, they get them to Louisiana as fast as they can,” Bell said. He suggests that if a habeas petition is filed while the individual is still under Alabama’s jurisdiction, they may be able to challenge mandatory detention. For those caught in the system, it represents a rare opportunity to tilt the odds in their favor.