Judge James F. Polivka

FY 2020 - 2025*, Oakdale Immigration Court

*data covers the first 11 months of fiscal year 2025

Published Nov 7, 2025

James F. Polivka was appointed as an Immigration Judge to begin hearing cases in February 2023. Judge Polivka earned a Bachelor of Science in 2007 from Ohio State University, Max M. Fisher College of Business, and a Juris Doctor in 2012 from Cleveland State University, Cleveland-Marshall College of Law. From 2014 to 2022, he served as an assistant chief counsel with the Office of the Principal Legal Advisor, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in Atlanta, San Francisco, and Oakdale, Louisiana. From 2013 to 2014, he served as an immigration services officer with the National Benefits Center, Field Operations Division, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS, in Overland Park, Kansas. Judge Polivka is a member of the Missouri Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Polivka were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2020 through the first 11 months of 2025. During this period, court records show that Judge Polivka decided 175 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted asylum for 22, granted 2 other types of relief, and denied relief to 151. Converted to percentage terms, Polivka denied 86.3 percent and granted 13.7 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Polivka'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 Polivka's denial rate of 86.3 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 58.9 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Oakdale Immigration Court where Judge Polivka decided these cases denied asylum 75.9 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Polivka'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 Polivka, 31.4% 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 Polivka came from Russia. Individuals from this country made up 37.1% of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Polivka were: Georgia (10.3%), Uzbekistan (9.7%), Colombia (4.6%), Mexico (4.0%). 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%).