Can AI Get Immigration Right?

Live results are on the Immigration Bench page. No AI model performs well enough to be trusted with immigration guidance. The top-performing model, Claude Fable 5.1, met 75.4% of each question’s rubric items on average, and gave a fully correct answer (defined as meeting every item on the rubric) on only 26.3% of questions. For the most vulnerable users, including those with Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) or Temporary Protected Status (TPS), even the best model met only 63.9% of rubric items on average. Models explain the law better than they apply it. Immigration advice depends on the specific person’s facts. Every model was better at explaining general rules than at working out what those rules mean for the person asking. Models that asked the person more questions did not score higher overall: asking questions earned credit on fact-finding items but did not improve the legal guidance itself. No single model has the full picture. Together, the 25 models met about 92% of what the experts asked for — but the best individual model met only 75.4%, meaning a significant share of what the benchmark requires sits outside any one model’s reach. Recent policy is the starkest exception: on…