Judge Sondra J. Miller-Wein

FY 2020 - 2025*, Hyattsville Immigration Court

*data covers the first 11 months of fiscal year 2025

Published Nov 7, 2025

Sondra J. Miller-Wein was appointed as an immigration judge to begin hearing cases in November 2023. Judge Miller-Wein earned a Bachelor of Science in 1985 from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and a Juris Doctor in 1992 from the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. From 2009 to 2023, she established and managed her law firm, Immigration Law Options LLC. From 2008 to 2009, she practiced immigration law with the Law Firm of David E. Piver, and from 2004 to 2008, was a staff attorney at HIAS Philadelphia. From 1997 to 2004, she was a general practitioner handling state court civil cases. From 1994 to 1997, she was an insurance defense litigator with Robert L. Hammond. From 1992 to 1993, she clerked for President Judge Robert A. Freedberg of the Court of Common Pleas. Her volunteer work included serving as chair of the Philadelphia Chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, as board chair of Esperanza Immigration Legal Services, and as president of the Doylestown Chapter of Hadassah. Judge Miller-Wein is a member of the Pennsylvania Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Miller-Wein were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2020 through the first 11 months of 2025. During this period, court records show that Judge Miller-Wein decided 369 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, she granted asylum for 171, granted 12 other types of relief, and denied relief to 186. Converted to percentage terms, Miller-Wein denied 50.4 percent and granted 49.6 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Miller-Wein'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 Miller-Wein's denial rate of 50.4 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 58.9 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Hyattsville Immigration Court where Judge Miller-Wein decided these cases denied asylum 48.3 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Miller-Wein'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 Miller-Wein, 16.8% 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 Miller-Wein came from El Salvador. Individuals from this country made up 15.2% of her caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Miller-Wein were: Cameroon (13.6%), Honduras (10.6%), Guatemala (9.2%), Venezuela (8.4%). 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%).