Skip to content

Posts from the ‘The Vault: FOIA & More’ Category

Immigration Judge Charles Conroy made baseless assumption on what the demeanor of a victim of sexual abuse should be.

Below are 24 BIA remands and underlying decisions of Immigration Judge Charles Conroy:

Loader Loading…
EAD Logo Taking too long?

Reload Reload document
| Open Open in new tab

Download [18.50 MB]

According to the Board of Immigration Appeals, Immigration Judge Charles Conroy determined an asylum applicant to be not credible because “the respondent was a bit hesitant when describing the sexual advances toward him by the Prime Minister.”

From the decision:

“…the respondent asserts that the Immigration Judge should not have based his adverse credibility finding on respondent’s demeanor while discussing the alleged sexual harassment. We Agree. The Immigration Judge’s only finding pertaining to demeanor was that “the respondent was a bit hesitant when describing” the “alleged sexual advances towards him by the Prime Minister. The Immigration Judge provided no basis for his assumption about how a victim of sexual harassment or sexual assault should testify. See Hu v. Holder, 579 F.3d 155, 159 (2d Cir. 2009) (holding that an Immigration Judge’s demeanor finding constituted “impermissible speculation” where he “provided no basis for his assumptions about how someone who had…a forced abortion would testify.” Therefore, the Immigration Judge’s demeanor finding does not support his adverse credibility determination.

Our question is this: what was Judge Conroy’s assumption on how victims of sexual harassment or assault should testify? The inverse of “a bit hesitant.” From the context given, it is reasonable to infer that Judge Conroy would doubt the credibility of many, if not most or all, victims of sexual abuse based on them merely appearing “a bit hesitant” when they revisit, recollect, and reconstruct the traumatic event(s) of being a victim of sexual abuse.

Here is the full BIA decision and Immigration Judge Charles Conroy’s underlying oral decision:

Loader Loading…
EAD Logo Taking too long?

Reload Reload document
| Open Open in new tab

Download [5.35 MB]

Here is the excerpt from Conroy’s decision:

Click here for all the results from FOIA of Immigration Judge Conroy BIA remands and decisions.

One Immigration Judge Filed 66% of complaints against Immigration Lawyers at NYC Immigration Courts

Since August of 2017, Immigration Judge Charles Conroy made a total of 29 complaints against Immigration Lawyers appearing before him out of a total of 44 complaints made by all the Immigration Judges in New York City Immigration Courts.

Here is the data from EOIR followed by original text of the FOIA request:

Loader Loading…
EAD Logo Taking too long?

Reload Reload document
| Open Open in new tab

Download [44.77 KB]

Please provide data on the number of complaints made by each

Immigration Judge in New York since August of 2017 on a quarterly basis up until the current date. 

Complaints are defined as any written or oral communication from an Immigration Judge to the EOIR’s Disciplinary counsel. 

New York Immigration Judges are defined as any Immigration Judge based in the following Immigration Courts in Manhattan: 
26 Federal Plaza

201 Varick Street

290 Broadway. 

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. 

Board of Immigration Appeals decisions by Board Members

Below are the statistics on appellate judges of the Board of Immigration Appeals from FY 2016 to June 24, 2020.

Loader Loading…
EAD Logo Taking too long?

Reload Reload document
| Open Open in new tab

Download [44.75 KB]