Judge Jeffrey Frederick

FY 2021 - 2026*, Orlando Immigration Court

*data covers the first 9 months of fiscal year 2026

Published Aug 27, 2026

Jeffrey S. Frederick was appointed as an Immigration Judge to begin hearing cases in October 2022. Judge Frederick earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1994 from Syracuse University and a Juris Doctor in 1999 from the State University of New York at Buffalo. From 2013 to 2022, he served as an assistant chief counsel, Office of the Principal Legal Advisor (OPLA), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in Los Angeles. From 2009 to 2013, he served as an assistant chief counsel, OPLA, ICE, DHS, in Phoenix and Tucson, Arizona. From 2000 to 2009, he served as a criminal defense lawyer and first assistant public defender in Oneida County, New York. Judge Frederick is a member of the Florida Bar and the New York State Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Frederick were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2021 through the first 9 months of 2026. During this period, court records show that Judge Frederick decided 227 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted asylum for 7, granted 32 other types of relief, and denied relief to 188. Converted to percentage terms, Frederick denied 82.8 percent and granted 17.2 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Frederick'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 Frederick's denial rate of 82.8 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 62.9 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Orlando Immigration Court where Judge Frederick decided these cases denied asylum 72.3 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Frederick'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 (74%) are denied asylum. In contrast, a significantly higher proportion of represented asylum seekers are successful. In the case of Judge Frederick, 29.5% were not represented by an attorney. See Figure 3. For the nation as a whole, about 18.8% 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 Frederick came from Venezuela. Individuals from this country made up 18.5% of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Frederick were: Colombia (17.6%), Honduras (11.5%), Mexico (11.0%), Guatemala (7.5%). 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 (10.1%), Guatemala (9.4%), Mexico (9.1%), El Salvador (8.7%), Venezuela (6.8%), Colombia (5.6%), Ecuador (5.3%), Nicaragua (4.8%), India (4.7%), China (4.7%), Russia (3.3%), Brazil (3.2%), Peru (2.9%).