Judge Jennifer E. Piateski

FY 2020 - 2025*, Sterling Immigration Court

*data covers the first 11 months of fiscal year 2025

Published Nov 7, 2025

Jennifer E. Piateski was appointed as a Unit Chief Immigration Judge to begin supervisory immigration court duties and hearing cases in December 2021. Judge Piateski earned a Bachelor of Arts in 2000 from the University of Maryland, College Park, and a Juris Doctor in 2004 from the University of Baltimore. In 2021, she served as the Acting Freedom of Information Act Officer and Associate Center Director, National Records Center, Immigration Records and Identity Services Directorate, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in Lee’s Summit, Missouri. From 2020 to 2021, she served as the Acting Deputy Chief of Staff, USCIS, DHS, in the District of Columbia and Camp Springs, Maryland. From 2016 to 2020, she served as Associate Counsel for Bar Discipline, Office of the Chief Counsel, USCIS, DHS, in the District of Columbia. From 2007 to 2016, she served as an Assistant Chief Counsel, Office of the Principal Legal Advisor (OPLA), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), DHS, in Baltimore. From 2006 to 2007, she served as an Assistant Chief Counsel, OPLA, ICE, DHS, in Los Angeles. From 2005 to 2006, she served as a Judicial Law Clerk, Executive Office for Immigration Review, Department of Justice, in Las Vegas, entering on duty through the Attorney General Honor’s Program. Judge Piateski is a member of the Maryland State Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Piateski were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2020 through the first 11 months of 2025. During this period, court records show that Judge Piateski decided 199 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, she granted asylum for 52, granted 3 other types of relief, and denied relief to 144. Converted to percentage terms, Piateski denied 72.4 percent and granted 27.6 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Piateski's denial rate each fiscal year over this recent period. (Rates for years with less than 25 decisions are not shown.)

Nationwide Comparisons

Compared to Judge Piateski's denial rate of 72.4 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 58.9 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Sterling Immigration Court where Judge Piateski decided these cases denied asylum 60 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Piateski's asylum grant and denial rates are compared with other judges serving on the same court in this table. Note that when an Immigration Judge serves on more than one court during the same period, separate Immigration Judge reports are created for any Court in which the judge rendered at least 100 asylum decisions.

Why Do Denial Rates Vary Among Judges?

Although denial rates are shaped by each Judge's judicial philosophy, denial rates are also shaped by other factors, such as the types of cases on the Judge's docket, the detained status of immigrant respondents, current immigration policies, and other factors beyond an individual Judge's control. For example, TRAC has previously found that legal representation and the nationality of the asylum seeker are just two factors that appear to impact asylum decision outcomes.

The composition of cases may differ significantly between Immigration Courts in the country. Within a single Court when cases are randomly assigned to judges sitting on that Court, each Judge should have roughly a similar composition of cases given a sufficient number of asylum cases. Then variations in asylum decisions among Judges on the same Immigration Court would appear to reflect, at least in part, the judicial philosophy that the Judge brings to the bench. However, if judges within a Court are assigned to specialized dockets or hearing locations, then case compositions are likely to continue to differ and can contribute to differences in asylum denial rates.

Representation

When asylum seekers are not represented by an attorney, almost all of them (77%) are denied asylum. In contrast, a significantly higher proportion of represented asylum seekers are successful. In the case of Judge Piateski, 4.5% were not represented by an attorney. See Figure 3. For the nation as a whole, about 17.1% of asylum seekers are not represented.

Nationality

Asylum seekers are a diverse group. Over one hundred different nationalities had at least one hundred individuals claiming asylum decided during this period. As might be expected, immigration courts located in different parts of the country tend to have proportionately larger shares from some countries than from others. And, given the required legal grounds for a successful asylum claim, asylum seekers from some nations tend to be more successful than others.

The largest group of asylum seekers appearing before Judge Piateski came from Honduras. Individuals from this country made up 23.1% of her caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Piateski were: El Salvador (18.6%), Guatemala (16.6%), Peru (6.5%), Mexico (4.5%). See Figure 4.

In the nation as a whole during this same period, major nationalities of asylum seekers, in descending order of frequency, were Honduras (11.2%), Guatemala (11.2%), El Salvador (10.9%), Mexico (8.2%), China (5.2%), Venezuela (5.2%), India (5.1%), Ecuador (4.5%), Nicaragua (4.4%), Colombia (4.4%), Brazil (3.1%), Russia (3.1%), Cuba (2.8%).