Asylum Denied More Often by Politically Vetted Judges; DOJ Failure to Increase Number of Judges

An August 24, 2008 analysis by The New York Times revealed that immigration judges who were vetted for political affiliations before being hired disproportionately denied asylum. The analysis was based on statistics obtained by Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), associated with Syracuse University. On July 28, 2008, the Inspector General of the Department of Justice had issued a report documenting the politicized hiring of immigration judges and others within the Department of Justice. Another TRAC study found that there has been no increase in the number of immigration judges despite the Justice Department’s 2006 commitment to increase the number of judges.

Click here to read the August 24, 2008 New York Times Article

Click here to read the July 28, 2008 Report by the Justice Department Office of the Inspector General

Click here to read the July 28, 2008 TRAC Report

DHS Considers Medical Care as "Material Support"

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security continues to take the position that the provision of medical care constitutes “material support” when provided to injured members of an armed group. A recent piece, researched by ABC news, profiled the cases of a Sudanese doctor who treated rebels in Darfur and a Nepalese medical worker who was kidnapped and forced to provide aid to Maoist rebels.

Click here to read the story

Attorney General Overturns Previous Rulings on Coerced Population Control

On May 15, 2008, the U.S. Attorney General issued a decision in Matter of J-S-, holding that spouses of individuals subjected to forced sterilization or abortion do not qualify as refugees by that fact alone.  The decision in this case, which the Attorney General had ordered the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) to certify to him last September, overturns the BIA’s holdings in two earlier precedential cases, Matter of C-Y-Z-, 21 I&N Dec. 915 (BIA 1997) and Matter of S-L-L-, 24 I&N Dec. 1 (BIA 2006)(en banc), that the spouses of victims of forced abortion or sterilization should automatically be considered to meet the refugee definition on that basis.  In his decision, the Attorney General notes that such applicants may still qualify for asylum or refugee status based on a showing of past persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution based on their own failure or refusal to undergo sterilization or abortion, their resistance to coercive population control, or other grounds recognized under U.S. law.

Click here to read the May 15, 2008 decision in Matter of J-S-, 24 I&N 520 (A.G. 2008)

Attorney General Certified Cases Address Effective Assistance of Counsel before Immigration Courts

On August 7, 2008, the U.S Attorney General certified to himself three unpublished BIA decisions addressing the question of whether and to what extent non-citizens who are represented in immigration proceedings have a right to effective assistance of counsel.   In reviewing the three cases, the Attorney General will also examine whether and how requirements set forth in Matter of Lozada, 19 I&N Dec. 637 (1988) shall continue to apply to claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.  A range of groups have written to the Attorney General protesting the surprise nature of this decision to reexamine longstanding precedents and the tight deadline (September 15, 2008) and word limits (9,000 words) imposed on amicus briefs.

Board of Immigration Appeals Rules on Gang-Based Asylum Cases

In a July 30, 2008 decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals, the BIA ruled that Salvadoran youth who have been subjected to and resisted or rejected gang recruitment based on opposition to gang values, as well as their family members, do not constitute a particular social group (Matter of S-E-G-, 24 I&N Dec. 579 (BIA 2008). In a ruling issued the same day in the Matter of E-A-G-, 24 I&N Dec. 591 (BIA 2008), the court ruled in a case of a young Honduran male that he had not established that he was a member of a social group of “persons resistant to gang membership.” The BIA also ruled that a social group of “young persons who are perceived to be affiliated with gangs,” does not constitute a social group.  In both cases the BIA found that individuals who refuse gang recruitment fail the “social visibility” test and therefore do not constitute a social group.

Click here to read the July 30, 2008 decision in Matter of S-E-G-

Click here to read the July 30, 2008 decision in Matter of E-A-G-