A legal watchdog group called Bench Receipts has released an audit of 58 foreign-born federal judges, examining how they rule on immigration enforcement and criminal cases. The group describes itself as a monitor of judiciary, prosecutor and sheriff actions.
The audit focused on Article III judges — those appointed by a president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate — across district courts and courts of appeals. Its stated goal was to determine whether foreign-born judges favor immigrants and criminal defendants over immigration enforcement and public safety.
According to Bench Receipts, the key pattern that emerged was not birthplace but prior career background. Of the 58 judges reviewed, 43, or 74.1 percent, were appointed by Democratic presidents — 28 by President Biden and 15 by President Obama. The group says many of these judges previously worked at organizations such as the ACLU, the National Immigration Law Center, or in public defender offices. The audit found this group ruled against border enforcement at an 80.1 percent rate.
By comparison, the audit counted 14 judges appointed by President Trump and one by President Bush, with an anti-border ruling rate of 14.3 percent.
The report names specific judges on both ends of its scale. U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan, born in Trinidad and appointed by Biden, is listed with a 94 percent anti-border rate and a 62 percent pro-crime rate. U.S. District Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin, born in Mexico and also a Biden appointee, is listed at 93 percent anti-border and 63 percent pro-crime. Judge Jon Tigar, born in England, a former San Francisco public defender appointed by President Obama, has the highest marks in the audit at 94 percent anti-border and 65 percent pro-crime.
On the other side of the ledger, the audit lists judges appointed by President Trump. Judge Aileen Cannon, born in Colombia, is recorded at 10 percent anti-border and 19 percent pro-crime. Judge James C. Ho, born in Taiwan, has the lowest rates in the audit, 5 percent anti-border and 12 percent pro-crime.
Bench Receipts frames its findings as evidence that a judge’s prior career — particularly work with immigrant-rights or public defender organizations — correlates more strongly with case outcomes than the judge’s country of origin. The group has not published the full methodology behind its percentage calculations, including how individual rulings were categorized as
