Pamela A. Harris

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit circuit Appointed by Barack Obama (Democratic) 33 signed orders read

How Judge Harris decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

In immigration and refugee cases she holds the agency to its duty of reasoned decision-making and reads the nexus requirement functionally: where the record shows a family relationship is why this applicant, and not someone else, was targeted, she treats the agency's contrary finding as compelled error rather than a permissible factual call.

“The record compels the conclusion that at least one central reason for Salgado-Sosa’s persecution is membership in his family, a protected social group under the Immigration and Nationality Act.”

She reads jurisdictional and exhaustion rules narrowly against forfeiture, distinguishing a true limit on a court's power from a mere precondition to suit, so that a claim is not lost to a mislabeled 'jurisdictional' bar or a permissive grievance clause.

“We hold that the Supreme Court’s § 301(a) exhaustion requirement is not jurisdictional, and that the agreement at issue in this case does not require exhaustion.”

Procedural preferences

She guards the availability of review and the correct sequencing of decisions: she reads final-order and jurisdictional rules with care and, when a live controversy disappears on appeal, follows the customary practice of vacating the judgment below and remanding with instructions to dismiss as moot rather than leaving a merits ruling standing.

“For the foregoing reasons, we vacate the district court’s judgment and remand the case with instructions to dismiss the case as moot.”

She treats a class-certification prerequisite as something a district court must confront before certifying: where every class member signed a class-action waiver, that waiver must be resolved at the certification stage, and a certification that skips it will be vacated in full.

“For the foregoing reasons, we vacate the district court’s certification order and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Cautions

In civil-rights and employment cases she insists that a court on summary judgment view the evidence in the non-movant's favor and leave genuine factual disputes to a jury; where the district court resolves a material dispute against the non-moving party, she vacates rather than excusing it as harmless.

“That function is reserved for a jury, and only if “the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact” may summary judgment be awarded.”

In criminal sentencing she enforces the requirement of particularized, reviewable findings: an enhancement or drug-quantity attribution supported only by a bare recitation of facts untethered to the governing legal test will be vacated for resentencing rather than salvaged on appeal.

“For the foregoing reasons, we vacate Evans’s sentence and remand for resentencing proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Reynaldo Salgado-Sosa v. Attorney General
No. 16-1594 · 2018-02-13
Petition for review (petitioner (Honduran asylum applicant fleeing MS-13)) Granted in part

“PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART, AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS”

Sindy Alvarez Lagos v. Attorney General
No. 17-2291 · 2019-06-14
Petition for review (petitioners (Honduran mother and daughter threatened by a gang)) Granted

“PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED, REVERSED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS”

Williams Rodriguez Salgado v. Attorney General
No. 21-1864 · 2023-05-31
Petition for review (petitioner (applicant for cancellation of removal)) Moot / procedural

“For the foregoing reasons, the petition is dismissed. PETITION DISMISSED”

Zuowei Chen v. Attorney General
No. 21-1371 · 2023-07-06
Petition for review (petitioner (Chinese national persecuted for his Christian faith)) Granted

“PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; VACATED AND REMANDED”

Adan Tomas-Ramos v. Attorney General
No. 20-1201 · 2022-02-02
Petition for review (petitioner (Guatemalan national subject to a reinstated removal order)) Granted

“PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; VACATED AND REMANDED”

Maria Guzman Chavez v. Russell Hott
Nos. 18-6086; 18-6419 · 2019-10-10
Appeal (appellants (the Government)) Denied

“AFFIRMED”

United States v. Travis Skaggs
No. 20-4303 · 2022-01-18
Appeal (appellant (defendant challenging a sentencing enhancement)) Denied

“For the reasons given above, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.”

United States v. Andrew Krueger
No. 24-4328 · 2025-07-25
Appeal (appellant (defendant convicted of child-exploitation offenses)) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, we hold that the district court correctly denied Krueger’s suppression motion and affirm Krueger’s conviction.”

United States v. Rodriquies Evans
No. 21-4181 · 2024-01-05
Appeal (appellant (defendant sentenced on drug-conspiracy convictions)) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, we vacate Evans’s sentence and remand for resentencing proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

United States v. Robert Benton, Jr.
No. 19-7471 · 2022-01-24
Appeal (appellant (defendant challenging an ACCA sentence)) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the district court’s order denying Benton’s § 2255 motion, vacate his § 922(g) sentence, and remand for resentencing.”

United States v. Jarvis Jackson
No. 23-4580 · 2025-01-31
Appeal (appellant (defendant sentenced for a firearm offense)) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, we vacate Jackson’s sentence and remand for resentencing proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

United States v. Christopher Singletary
No. 19-4381 · 2021-01-12
Appeal (appellant (defendant sentenced for Hobbs Act robbery)) Granted

“For the reasons stated, we vacate Singletary’s sentence and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Put Judge Harris's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Harris actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Harris's own signed orders and cites them.