Asylum Tracker — US asylum statistics from public EOIR, USCIS and ICE data

Alison E Daw (AED): 60.2% Asylum Grant Rate

These decision records are attributed to EOIR judge code AED, labeled Alison E Daw in the imported lookup. 1,323 asylum merits decisions; 60.2% granted (All available decision history). Historical code records are not verified personal tenure. Statistics describe past decisions, not individual outcomes. Not legal advice.

How we estimate

EOIR grant rate means grants divided by grants plus denials for asylum merits decisions, excluding other closures. Rates require at least 2 decisions; rankings require at least 30. Proceedings history can extend to 1951; the first recorded asylum merits month in this import is Dec 1972. Each dataset states its own coverage. Do not interpret proceedings coverage as asylum decision coverage. Reconstructed pending counts may differ from agency totals. Historical judge-code attribution is not verified personal tenure.

Key facts

EOIR judge code AED, labeled Alison E Daw in the imported lookup, has 1,323 recorded asylum merits decisions in All available decision history.

The merits grant rate is 60.2%: grants divided by grants plus denials.

Statistics describe past decisions, not individual outcomes. Not legal advice.

Metric
Asylum merits grant rate
Value
60.2%
Sample size
1,323
Period
All available decision history
Source
EOIR FOIA case data
Last updated
Oct 4, 2026

These statistics are attributed to EOIR judge code AED. Historical code records and court assignments are not a verified biography or proof of personal tenure.

Data through: Aug 2026Source published: Sep 1, 2026Source updated: Sep 1, 2026Imported: Oct 4, 2026 Source: EOIR FOIA case data Methodology and limitations Public API

Cite this page: Alison E Daw (AED): 60.2% Asylum Grant Rate. https://asylumstats.com/judges/alison-e-daw-aed. Data through Aug 2026; source published Sep 1, 2026; imported Oct 4, 2026. Include your access date when citing.

Totals and breakdowns use the canonical page period. Court and nationality trend tables include all available decision history; other trend tables use their labeled periods. All tables apply the display floor. Interactive filters can select a different period. Empty buckets and cells below the floor have no reported rate.
Decision trend
GroupGrantsDenialsMerits decisionsAsylum merits grant rate
1986 0 0 0 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
1987 0 0 0 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
1988 0 0 0 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
1989 0 1 1 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
1990 0 0 0 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
1991 0 1 1 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
1992 0 0 0 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
1993 0 0 0 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
1994 0 0 0 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
1995 0 2 2 0.0%
1996 0 6 6 0.0%
1997 0 2 2 0.0%
1998 0 1 1 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
1999 0 0 0 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
2000 0 0 0 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
2001 0 0 0 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
2002 0 0 0 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
2003 3 0 3 100.0%
2004 0 2 2 0.0%
2005 0 3 3 0.0%
2006 24 33 57 42.1%
2007 22 34 56 39.3%
2008 29 49 78 37.2%
2009 18 41 59 30.5%
2010 38 27 65 58.5%
2011 47 35 82 57.3%
2012 22 16 38 57.9%
2013 21 20 41 51.2%
2014 30 44 74 40.5%
2015 17 27 44 38.6%
2016 87 15 102 85.3%
2017 96 49 145 66.2%
2018 22 41 63 34.9%
2019 0 0 0 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
2020 0 0 0 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
2021 0 1 1 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
2022 0 1 1 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
2023 3 1 4 75.0%
2024 233 40 273 85.4%
2025 85 34 119 71.4%
2026 0 0 0 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
Representation breakdown
GroupGrantsDenialsMerits decisionsAsylum merits grant rate
Represented 715 366 1,081 66.1%
Not represented 82 160 242 33.9%
Custody breakdown
GroupGrantsDenialsMerits decisionsAsylum merits grant rate
Never detained 618 268 886 69.8%
Released 131 91 222 59.0%
Detained 48 167 215 22.3%
Unknown 0 0 0 Too few decisions to report a rate (minimum 2).
Courts recorded for this judge code
Other judges at the comparison court
Leading nationalities by decisions

Frequently asked questions

What is the asylum grant rate for Alison E Daw?

These decision records are attributed to EOIR judge code AED, labeled Alison E Daw in the imported lookup. 1,323 asylum merits decisions; 60.2% granted (All available decision history). Historical code records are not verified personal tenure. Rates reflect the period and sample on this page. Statistics describe past decisions, not individual outcomes. Not legal advice.

How long does the asylum process take?

Completed claims with recorded filing and decision dates averaged 604 days from filing to decision; this is not a forecast for pending cases. The data cannot predict how long a pending case will take. Court proceedings, USCIS interviews and green-card processing are different processes.

Which nationalities have the most decisions for Alison E Daw?

El Salvador; Russia; Mexico. Counts reflect the page’s reporting period and the EOIR nationality codes, which include historical categories.

Does a judge’s past grant rate predict my case?

No. These are observational statistics attributed to EOIR judge codes, not a prediction or assessment of a named person’s entire career. Case mix, period, representation and custody can differ. For individual advice, consult a qualified legal representative.

Why is a grant rate or ranking missing?

We display a rate only with at least 2 merits decisions and rank judges or court comparisons only with at least 30. Small samples can vary widely. A missing rate is not a zero grant rate.

How can I check my immigration court case?

Use EOIR Automated Case Information for court case details and rely on official notices. Use USCIS Case Status Online for USCIS receipt numbers. These aggregate statistics do not look up individual cases.