Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2320845
 


 



Explaining the Divergence in Asylum Grant Rates Among Immigration Judges: An Attitudinal and Cognitive Approach


Linda Keith


University of Texas at Dallas - Department of Political Science

Jennifer S. Holmes


University of Texas at Dallas - School of Economics, Political and Policy Sciences

Banks Miller


University of Texas at Dallas

October 2013

Law & Policy, Vol. 35, Issue 4, pp. 261-289, 2013

Abstract:     
In seeking to understand the variation in asylum grant rates by immigration judges (IJs), we apply a variation of the attitudinal model that we modify by incorporating a cognitive model of decision making, arguing that some pieces of information before IJs are treated objectively while others are treated subjectively. This model allows us to account for informational cues that influence decisions while assessing the impact of national interests and human rights conditions. We find that IJ policy predispositions play a dominant role, and that liberal IJs respond to applicant characteristics differently than conservatives, but also that the law constrains decision making.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 29

Accepted Paper Series


Date posted: September 5, 2013  

Suggested Citation

Keith, Linda and Holmes, Jennifer S. and Miller, Banks, Explaining the Divergence in Asylum Grant Rates Among Immigration Judges: An Attitudinal and Cognitive Approach (October 2013). Law & Policy, Vol. 35, Issue 4, pp. 261-289, 2013. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2320845 or http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/lapo.12008

Contact Information

Linda Keith (Contact Author)
University of Texas at Dallas - Department of Political Science ( email )
Richardson, TX 75083
United States
Jennifer S. Holmes
University of Texas at Dallas - School of Economics, Political and Policy Sciences ( email )
2601 North Floyd Road
Richardson, TX 75083
United States
Banks Miller
University of Texas at Dallas ( email )
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 108
Downloads: 1
Paper comments
No comments have been made on this paper

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.328 seconds