Judge Juan Roman

FY 2021 - 2026*, Omaha Immigration Court

*data covers the first 9 months of fiscal year 2026

Published Aug 27, 2026

Juan Román was appointed as an immigration judge to begin hearing cases in March 2026. Judge Román earned a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science in 2000 from the University of Nebraska at Omaha, a Juris Doctor in 2003 from Creighton University School of Law, and a Master of Laws in Military Law in 2012 from the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General’s School. From February 2023 to February 2026, he served as assistant chief counsel with the Office of the Principal Legal Advisor, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in Omaha, Nebraska. From October 2021 to February 2023, he served as chief counsel at the Nebraska Department of Education in Lincoln, Nebraska. From July 2020 to October 2021, he served as assistant chief counsel with DHS, in Seattle. From March 2019 to July 2020, he was a senior trial attorney at Allstate in Seattle. From 2003 to 2018, he served as a judge advocate in the U.S. Army in various locations, including as a defense counsel, chief of military justice, senior legal advisor, chief of operational and international law, and deputy legal advisor for corrections. Judge Román is a member of the Nebraska State Bar.

Deciding Asylum Cases

Detailed data on decisions by Judge Roman were examined for the period covering fiscal years 2021 through the first 9 months of 2026. During this period, court records show that Judge Roman decided 111 asylum claims on their merits. Of these, he granted asylum for 1, granted 0 other types of relief, and denied relief to 110. Converted to percentage terms, Roman denied 99.1 percent and granted 0.9 percent of asylum cases (including forms of relief other than asylum).

Figure 1 provides a comparison of Judge Roman'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 Roman's denial rate of 99.1 percent, Immigration Court judges across the country denied 62.9 percent of asylum claims during this same period. Judges at the Omaha Immigration Court where Judge Roman decided these cases denied asylum 85.8 percent of the time. See Figure 2.

Judge Roman'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 Roman, 3.6% 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 Roman came from Guatemala. Individuals from this country made up 55.0% of his caseload. Other nationalities in descending order of frequency appearing before Judge Roman were: El Salvador (14.4%), Mexico (10.8%), Honduras (7.2%), Venezuela (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 (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%).