Judge Kristi Nelson

FY 2020 - 2025*, Chicago Immigration Court

*data covers the first 11 months of fiscal year 2025

Published Nov 7, 2025

Kristi Nelson was appointed as an immigration judge to begin hearing cases in November 2023. Judge Nelson earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1992 from the University of Tulsa and a Juris Doctor in 1995 from DePaul University College of Law. From 2016 to 2023, she was a partner at Gair Eberhard Nelson Dedinas Ltd. in Chicago. During this time in 2018, she served as a volunteer attorney for the Dilley Pro Bono Project, where she represented detained noncitizens in Dilley, Texas. From 2006 to 2016, she was a partner at Chen Nelson Roberts Ltd. in Chicago. In 2005, she served as a law clerk for the Honorable Suzanne B. Conlon of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. In addition to her private practice, from 1998 to 2013, she served as pro bono counsel for National Immigrant Justice Center in Chicago where she represented noncitizens before EOIR. From 1999 to 2004, she was an associate and partner with Freeman, Freeman & Salzman PC; from 1997 to 1999, she was a litigation associate with Dickinson Wright PLLC; and from 1995 to 1997, she was a litigation associate at the law firm Rudnick & Wolfe (now DLA Piper), all in Chicago. Judge Nelson is a member of the Illinois State Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Nelson were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2020 through the first 11 months of 2025. During this period, court records show that Judge Nelson decided 123 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, she granted asylum for 61, granted 0 other types of relief, and denied relief to 62. Converted to percentage terms, Nelson 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 Nelson'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 Nelson'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 Chicago Immigration Court where Judge Nelson decided these cases denied asylum 44.2 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Nelson'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 Nelson, 22.8% 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 Nelson came from Russia. Individuals from this country made up 10.6% of her caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Nelson were: Venezuela (8.9%), India (7.3%), Nicaragua (7.3%), China (6.5%). 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%).