Three years ago, asylum seekers with cases in court had a 50 percent probability of receiving protection. Today, the odds have dropped to just 6 percent. A new rule implemented this summer allows asylum officers to send seekers directly to immigration court, bypassing an interview. This aims to tighten standards and expedite deportations. Many legal experts view the situation as dire, often seeing case battles as futile. Amid heightened ICE arrests, legal representation is crucial. Those with attorneys are 4.7 times more likely to secure relief than those without.
Competent lawyers can guide clients through the asylum process and other protection avenues. As navigating the system grows tougher, legal expertise can mean the difference between deportation and safety. However, over half of immigrants remain without representation, often due to cost and accessibility. In rural America, the need is acute. About 1.8 million immigrants reside in these areas, making up significant portions of the workforce, including 28 percent of the agricultural workforce and 14 percent of surgeons and physicians.
Yet, immigration lawyers are scarce in small towns. Although rural areas hold 20 percent of the U.S. population, they account for only 2 percent of lawyers across all fields. “Legal deserts” are regions where the attorney shortage is extreme. Here, a few lawyers often work pro bono alongside heavy caseloads, covering vast distances. Clients frequently lack payment ability, and courthouses can be hours away. In these settings, AI could play a transformative role.
A typical asylum application involves 50 to 75 hours of research, case management, and document review over months. AI excels in such tasks, enhancing system capacity by reducing repetitive work time.
This essential work is crucial for winning cases. Yet, every hour on it is an hour not spent with clients or helping the next family. During my time in the Upper Valley region of Vermont and New Hampshire, I conducted case research for an immigration attorney at a nonprofit for survivors of gender-based violence. Limited staffing forced attorneys to turn away possible cases. This experience led me to create AI research software aiding attorneys in assembling sources for asylum claims, thus increasing their case capacity.
AI is increasingly common in law. Many legal organizations and firms have integrated AI into their operations. Thomson Reuters notes their AI for Justice program enables legal nonprofits to expedite case preparations by up to 75 percent. The Innocence Center has halved the time needed for wrongful-conviction petition prep, cutting it from a year to six months. A University of California-Berkeley study found that 90 percent of legal aid lawyers utilizing generative AI tools reported increased productivity, particularly in research and document tasks dominating immigration cases.
AI tools have limitations, such as potential inaccuracies in data and sources. However, well-crafted tools can address these concerns through audit logs and verifiable source requirements. Attorney guidance and supervision are still necessary. AI’s real value lies in its potential to empower attorneys rather than replace them.
While there is much discussion about AI threatening jobs, its capacity to boost sectors with limited resources is often overlooked. In rural immigration law and other fields, we should explore how AI can extend representation and services in communities needing it most.
Ella Tesone, a high school student from Norwich, Vt., founded Asyla LLC, a social enterprise offering AI-driven software for immigration lawyers.