Although there are legal norms to secure the uniform treatment of asylum claims in the United States, anecdotal and empirical evidence suggest that strategic and economic interests also influence asylum outcomes. Previous research has demonstrated considerable variation in how immigration judges decide seemingly similar cases, which implies a host of legal concerns—not the least of which is whether judicial bias is more determinative of the decision to admit those fleeing persecution to the United States than is the merit of the claim. These disparities also raise important policy considerations about how to fix what many perceive to be a broken adjudication system. With theoretical sophistication and empirical rigor, Immigration Judges and U.S. Asylum Policy investigates more than 500,000 asylum cases that were decided by U.S. immigration judges between 1990 and 2010. The authors find that judges treat certain facts about an asylum applicant more objectively than others: facts determined to be legally relevant tend to be treated similarly by judges of different political ideologies, while facts considered extralegal are treated subjectively. Furthermore, the authors examine how local economic and political conditions as well as congressional reforms have affected outcomes in asylum cases, concluding with a series of policy recommendations aimed at improving the quality of immigration law decision making rather than trying to reduce disparities between decision makers.
29 William R. Yates Memorandum, Requests for Evidence (RFE) and Notices of Intent to Deny (NOID), dated February 16, 2005, HQOPRD 70/2; available at ...
The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) of 1952, as originally enacted, did not contain any language on asylum. Asylum provisions were added and then revised by a series of subsequent laws.
Refugee Roulette is the first analysis of decisions at all four levels of the asylum adjudication process: the Department of Homeland Security, the immigration courts, the Board of Immigration Appeals, and the United States Courts of ...
Describes one political refugee's long and difficult struggle through immigration processing, detailing his imprisonment in Kenya, his escape to the U.S., and the ordeal of dealing with a bureaucracy that sought to deport him.
The requirements set forth in this manual are binding on the parties who appear before the Immigration Courts, unless the Immigration Judge directs otherwise in a particular case.
The chief 's office reminded the regional directors of the importance of maximum participation in two e-mails during the survey period. E-mail to Philip G. Schrag from Ted H. Kim, Asylum Office Deputy Chief (June 14, 2011).
Walzer, Michael. 1983. Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality. New York: Basic Books. Waslin, Michele. 2011. “The Secure Communities Program: Unanswered Questions and Continuing Concerns,” Special Report on Immigration.
This book assesses the role of the federal judiciary in immigration and the institutional evolution of the Supreme Court and the US Courts of Appeals.
Focusing on previously unstudied decisions in the Roosevelt and Bush administrations, this book divulges both the human tragedy of our current immigration system and the human crises that led to its creation.
This volume features reporting on the human consequences of the growing immigration crisis, exploring the factors that drive asylum seekers to American borders and the long, complicated path that awaits them as they attempt to find a safe ...