Hostname: page-component-669899f699-chc8l Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-29T08:47:30.326Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Leveling the Odds: The Effect of Quality Legal Representation in Cases of Asymmetrical Capability

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2024

Banks Miller ,
Linda Camp Keith  and
Jennifer S. Holmes
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

How much does attorney quality influence the outcome of cases in which one litigant is significantly more capable than the other? Using a unique dataset of all asylum merits decision from 1990 to 2010, we find that high quality representation evens the odds for asylum applicants and that not being represented by legal counsel is actually better than being represented by a poor lawyer. In this analysis, we draw on a modified party capability theory and create new measures of attorney capability. We find that variation in attorney capability is a primary driver of the disparity in asylum outcomes in U.S. immigration courts and that a likely causal mechanism for this influence is the judge-specific reputation of an attorney.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 49 , Issue 1 , March 2015 , pp. 209 - 239
Copyright
© 2015 Law and Society Association.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

We thank Andrew Craven and Diep Truong for their excellent assistance in gathering data on immigration attorneys. In addition, the American Immigration Lawyers Association graciously provided information on the membership of attorneys in their organization. A previous version of this article was presented at the 2013 Southern Political Science Conference, where we received valuable feedback from Pamela Corley.

References

References

Abrams, David S., & Yoon, Albert H. (2007) “The Luck of the Draw Using Random Case Assignment to Investigate Attorney Ability” 74 Univ. of Chicago Law Rev. 1145–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexander, Sydenham B. (2006) “A Political Response to Crisis in the Immigration Courts,” 21 Georgetown Immigration Law J. 1–60.Google Scholar
American Bar Association Commission on Immigration (2004) Immigration Detainee Pro Bono Opportunities Guide. Available at: http//www.nlada.org/Training/Train_Civil/Equal_Justice/2005_Materials/71_2005_Pena_Handout1 (accessed 29 August 2014).Google Scholar
Amnesty International (2009) Jailed without Justice Immigration Detention in the USA. Available at: http//www.amnestyusa.org/pdfs/JailedWithoutJustice.pdf (accessed 29 August 2014).Google Scholar
Barbieri, Katherine, & Keshk, Omar (2012) Correlates of War Project Trade Data Set Codebook, Version 3.0. Available at: http//correlatesofwar.org (accessed 29 August 2014).Google Scholar
Barnes, Jennifer (2003) “Practice Context The Lawyer-Client Relationship in Immigration Law,” 52 Emory Law J. 1215–20.Google Scholar
Baum, Lawrence (2010) “Judicial Specialization and the Adjudication of Immigration Cases,” 59 Duke Law J. 1634–1721.Google Scholar
Becker, Andrew, & Cabrera, Hugo (2009) “Immigration Courts Make Do with Limited Resources Despite Mounting Caseloads,” Center for Investigative Reporting (June 29). http//cironline.org/reports/immigration-courts-make-do-limited-resources-despite-mounting-caseloads-2285 (accessed 28 August 2014).Google Scholar
Cameron, A. Colin, & Trivedi, Pravin K. (2009) Microeconometrics Using Stata. College Station, TX Stata Press.Google Scholar
Citrin, Jack, Donald Green, , Christopher Muste, , & Cara Wong, (1997) “Public Opinion Toward Immigration Reform: The Role of Economic Motivations,” 59 Journal of Politics 858–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornelius, Wayne A. & Mark Rosenblum, (2005) “Immigration and Politics,” 8 Annual Review of Political Science 99–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curry, Brett, & Miller, Banks (forthcoming) “Judicial Specialization and Decision Making on Generalized Appellate Courts,” Law & Social Inquiry.Google Scholar
Department of Justice (DOJ) Press Release (2009) Attorney General Vacates Compean Order, Initiates New Rulemaking to Govern Immigration Removal Proceedings. Available at: http//www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2009/June/09-ag-547.html (accessed 28 August 2014).Google Scholar
Epp, Charles R. (1999) “The Two Motifs of Why the Haves Come out Ahead and Its Heirs,” 33 Law & Society Rev. 1089–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galanter, Marc (1974) “Why the ‘Haves’ Come Out Ahead Speculations on the Limits of Legal Change,” 9 Law & Society Rev. 95–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
General Accounting Office (GAO) (2007) Alien Detention Standards Telephone Access Problems Were Pervasive at Detention Facilities; Other Deficiencies Did Not Show a Pattern of Noncompliance. Available at: http//www.gao.gov/new.items/d07875.pdf (accessed 28 August 2014).Google Scholar
Gryski, Gerard S., Main, Eleanor C., & Dixon, William J. (1986) “Social Backgrounds as Predictors of Votes on State Courts of Last Resort: The Case of Sex Discrimination,” 39 Western Political Q. 528–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haire, Susan Brodie, Lindquist, Stefanie A., & Hartley, Roger (1999) “Attorney Expertise, Litigant Success, and Judicial Decisionmaking in the U.S. Courts of Appeals,” 33 Law & Society Rev. 667–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heckman, James J. (1979) “Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error,” 47 Econometrica 153–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Homes, Jennifer & Linda Camp Keith (2010) “Does the Fear of Terrorists Trump the Fear of Persecution in Asylum Outcomes in the Post September 11 Era?,” 43 PS: Political Science & Politics 431–36.Google Scholar
Human Rights First (2009) “U.S. Detention of Asylum Seekers Seeking Protection, Finding Prison.” Available at: http//www.humanrightsfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf/090429-RP-hrf-asylum-detention-report.pdf (accessed 28 August 2014).Google Scholar
Johnson, Kristen, & Jarvis, M. (2007) “Fearing the United States Rethinking Mandatory Detention of Asylum Seekers,” 59 Administrative Law Rev. 589–620.Google Scholar
Johnson, Timothy R., Wahlbeck, Paul J., & Sprigss, James F. II (2006) "The Influence of Oral Arguments on the U.S. Supreme Court,” 100 American Political Science Rev. 99–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katzmann, Robert A. (2008) “The Legal Profession and the Unmet Needs of the Immigrant Poor,” 21 Georgetown J. of Legal Ethics 3–29.Google Scholar
Keith, Linda Camp, & Holmes, Jennifer (2009) “A Rare Examination of Typically Unobservable Factors in U.S. Asylum,” 22 J. of Refugee Studies 224–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keith, Linda Camp, Holmes, Jennifer, & Miller, Banks (2013) “Explaining Divergence in Asylum Grant Rates Among Immigration Judges An Attitudinal and Cognitive Approach,” 35 Law & Policy 261–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keith, Linda Camp, Miller, Banks, & Holmes, Jennifer (forthcoming) “How Draconian are Changes to U.S. Asylum Law? A Monthly Time Series Analysis (1990-2010),” Human Rights Q.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Peter (2008) A Guide to Econometrics, 6th ed. Malden, MA Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kinsey, Karyl A., & Stalans, Loretta J. (1999) “Which ‘Haves’ Come Out Ahead and Why? Cultural Capital and Legal Mobilization in Frontline Law Enforcement,” 33 Law & Society Rev. 993–1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kritzer, Herbert M. (1990) The Justice Broker Lawyers and Ordinary Litigation. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Kritzer, Herbert M. (1998) Legal Advocacy Lawyers and Nonlawyers at Work. Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kritzer, Herbert M. (2003) “The Government Gorilla Why Does Government Come Out Ahead in Appellate Courts,” in Kritzer, H., & Silbey, S., eds., In Litigation Do the Have's Still Come Out Ahead? Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Law, David S. (2005) “Strategic Judicial Lawmaking Ideology, Publication, and Asylum in the Ninth Circuit,” 73 Univ. of Cincinnati Law Rev. 817–66.Google Scholar
Legomsky, Stephen H. (2010) “Restructuring Immigration Adjudication,” 59 Duke Law J. 1634–721.Google Scholar
Liptak, Adam (2008) “The Verge of Expulsion, the Fringe of Justice,” New York Times (April 15). Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/15/us/15bar.html?_r=0 (accessed 28 August 2014).Google Scholar
Marshall, Monty G., & Jaggers, Keith (2013) “Polity IV Project Political Regime Characteristics and Transitions, 1800-2012.” Available at: http//www.systemicpeace.org/polity/polity4.htm (accessed August 28 2014).Google Scholar
Martin, David A. (2000) “The 1995 Asylum Reforms A Historic and Global Perspective,” Center for Immigration Studies Backgrounders and Reports. Washington D.C. Available at: http//www.cis.org/node/172 (accessed 1 December 2014).Google Scholar
Mauro, Tony (2000) “Appealing Practice,” 22 American Lawyer 11–13.Google Scholar
McAtee, Andrea, & McGuire, Kevin T. (2007) “Lawyers, Justices, and Issue Salience When and How Do Legal Arguments Affect the U.S. Supreme Court?” 41 Law & Society Rev. 259–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGuire, Kevin T. (1995) “Repeat Players in the Supreme Court The Role of Experienced Lawyers in Litigation Success,” 57 J. of Politics 187–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKeown, M. Margaret, & McLeod, Allegria (2009) “The Counsel Conundrum” in Ramij-Nogales, J., Schoenholtz, A., & Schrage, P., eds., Refugee Roulette Disparities in Asylum Adjudication and Proposals for Reform. New York: NYU Press.Google Scholar
Miller, Banks, & Curry, Brett (2009) “Expertise, Experience and Ideology on a Specialized Court The Case of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit,” 43 Law & Society Rev. 839–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Banks, & Curry, Brett (2013) “Experts Judging Experts: Agency Review on a Specialized Court,” 38 Law & Social Inquiry. 55–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Banks, Keith, Linda Camp, & Holmes, Jennifer (2014a) “Beyond Grant or Deny A More Nuanced Ordering of U.S. Asylum Outcomes,” 97 Judicature 172–78.Google Scholar
Miller, Banks, Keith, Linda Camp, & Holmes, Jennifer (2014b) “Immigration Judges and U.S. Asylum Policy.” Univ. of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Mottino, Felina (2000) Moving Forward The Role of Legal Counsel in New York City Immigration Courts. New York: Vera Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
Northwest Immigration Rights Project (2011) A Guide to the Northwest Detention Center. NWIRP Tacoma, WA. Available at: https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome=instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=A%20Guide%20to%20the%20Northwest%20Detention%20Center (accessed 28 August 2014).Google Scholar
Palmer, John R.B., Yale-Loehr, Stephen, & Cronin, Elizabeth (2005) “Why Are So Many People Challenging Board of Immigration Appeals Decisions in Federal Court? An Empirical Analysis of the Recent Surge in Petitions for Review,” 20 Georgetown Immigration Law J. 1–93.Google Scholar
Posner, Richard A., & Yoon, Albert H. (2011) “What Judges Think of the Quality of Legal Representation,” 63 Stanford Law Rev. 317–49.Google Scholar
Ramji-Nogales, Jaya, Schoenholtz, Andrew I., & Schrag, Philip G. (2007) “Refugee Roulette Disparities in Asylum Adjudication,” 60 Stanford Law Rev. 295–411.Google Scholar
Ramji-Nogales, Jaya, Schoenholtz, Andrew I., & Schrag, Philip G. (2009) Refugee Roulette Disparities in Asylum Adjudication and Proposals for Reform. New York: NYU Press.Google Scholar
Rehnquist, William H. (2002) The Supreme Court. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Rivlin, Gary (2006) “Dollars and Dreams Immigrants as Prey,” New York Times (June 11).Google Scholar
Rosenblum, Marc R., & Salehyan, Idean (2004) “Norms and Interests in US Asylum Enforcement,” 41 J. of Peace Research 677–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rottman, Andy J., Fariss, Christopher J., & Poe, Steven C. (2009) “The Path to Asylum in the US and the Determinants for Who Gets In and Why,” 43 International Migration Rev. 3–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samaha, Albert (2012) “Christopher Stender Court Upholds Injunction Against Attorney Accused of Scamming Immigrants,” (December 5). http//blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2012/12/christopher_stender_injunction.php (accessed 28 August 2014)Google Scholar
Schoenholtz, Andrew I., & Jonathan, Jacobs (2002) “State of Asylum Representation Ideas for Change” 16 Georgetown Immigration Law J. 739–72.Google Scholar
Schriro, Dora (2009) Immigration Detention Overview and Recommendations,” Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Washington DC: Department of Homeland Security.Google Scholar
Shannon, Careen (2009) “Regulating Immigration Legal Service Providers Inadequate Legal Service Providers Inadequate Representation and Notario Fraud,” 78 Fordham Law Rev. 577.Google Scholar
Sheehan, Reginald S., Mishler, William, & Songer, Donald S. (1992) “Ideology, Status, and the Differential Success of Direct Parties before the Supreme Court,” 4 American J. of Political Science 64–71.Google Scholar
Songer, Donald R., & Sheehan, Reginald S. (1992) “Who Wins on Appeal? Upperdogs and Underdogs in the United States Courts of Appeals,” 36 American J. of Political Science 235–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Staudt, Nancy, Lee Epstein, , & Peter Wiedenbec, (2006) “The Ideological Component of Judging in Taxation Context,” 84 Washington University Law Review 1797–1821.Google Scholar
Szmer, John, Johnson, Susan W., & Sarver, Tammy A. (2007) “Does the Lawyer Matter ? Influencing Outcomes on the Supreme Court of Canada,” 41 Law & Society Rev. 279–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
TRAC (Transactional Record Access Center) (2009) “Immigration Courts Still a Troubled Institution.” Available at: http//trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/210/ (accessed 28 August 2014).Google Scholar
USAID (2012) U.S. Overseas Loans and Grants: Obligations and Loan Authorizations. Available at: http://www.usaid.gov/developer/greenbookapi (accessed 1 December 2014).Google Scholar
Walsh, Frank M., & Walsh, Edward M. (2008) “Effective Processing or Assembly-Line Justice? The Use of Teleconferencing in Asylum Removal Hearings,” 22 Georgetown Immigration Law J. 259–84.Google Scholar
Wheeler, Stanton, Cartwright, Bliss, Kagan, Robert A., & Friedman, Lawrence M. (1987) “Do the ‘Haves’ Come Out Ahead? Winning and Losing in State Supreme Courts, 1870-1970,” 21 Law & Society Rev. 403–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, Reed, M., & Gibney, Mark A. (2010) “The Political Terror Scale (PTS) A Re-introduction and a Comparison to CIRI,” 33 Human Rights Q. 367–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Bank. Country classification of income categories. World Bank GNI per capita Analytical Classifications. Available at: http//go.worldbank.org/U9BK7IA1J0 (accessed 1 December 2014).Google Scholar

Cases Cited

Lok v. INS, 548 F.2d 37.Google Scholar
Matter of Lozada, 19 I&N Dec. 637 (BIA 1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matter of Compean, 24 I&N Dec. 710 (AG 2009).Google Scholar