Law Commons^™

The Fractured Colossus: An Evaluation Of Gender-Based Asylum Claims For The 2020s, Karlo Goronja

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

This Note analyzes asylum law’s lack of explicit protection for individuals who suffer persecution based on their gender, and the reluctance of immigration courts to grant asylum for claims centered on the applicant’s gender. This Note explores opportunities for relief from removal for gender-based asylum claims under the current framework, namely under the particular social group category of United States immigration law. After analysis under current law, this Note proposes a judicial resolution explicitly recognizing particular social groups such as “women from [country].” Next, a statutory of regulatory amendment is suggested that unequivocally allows for asylum claims on the basis …

It Is Time To Get Back To Basics On The Border, Donna Coltharp

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming.

Revisiting Immutability: Competing Frameworks For Adjudicating Asylum Claims Based On Membership In A Particular Social Group, Talia Shiff

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) defines a refugee as any person who has a “well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.” An emerging issue in U.S. asylum law is how to define the category “membership of a particular social group.” This question has become ever-more pressing in light of the fact that the majority of migrants seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border are claiming persecution on account of their “membership in a particular social group.” The INA does not define the meaning of “particular social group” and …

Not Your Average Summer Camp: Children In Immigration Detention, Cindy Izquierdo

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming.

Sexual Violence And Future Harm: Lessons From Asylum Law, Shawn E. Fields

Utah Law Review

Sexual violence victims face unique and enduring safety risks following an assault. The legal system’s gradual shift from solely punishing offenders for past acts to protecting survivors from future harm reflects a recognition of this fact. But so-called “sexual assault protection order” statutes impose onerous “future harm” requirements – including proof by clear and convincing evidence that another sexual assault is imminent – that belies the realities of ongoing injury for victims and creates barriers to protection similar to the criminal justice approach to rape.

This Article suggests a different approach, one justified by a novel analogy to the refugee …