ASYLUM - I REALLY NEED HELP

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

2 hours ago, nastra30 said:

Hmm - domestic abuse as basis for asylum? Domestic abuse happens in every single country. So if you happen to experience domestic abuse in the US will you seek asylum in Canada or U.K?

That's what this administration has been saying for a while now..... 

[Boiler 43,430]

Seems about 25% of the US population experience DV at some point and that is probably under reported.

[junkmart 320]

22 hours ago, belinda63 said:

I thought Trump did away with domestic violence being a reason for filing for asylum.

A federal judge blocked the administration's attempt to do away asylum for domestic abuse via PPG.

 

22 hours ago, Boiler said:

Domestic abuse is not a basis for seeking asylum. You can easily look up what Asylum is, a quick google.

 

On what basis is she in the US?  Visiting?

Since when? Trump tried to do away with it, but a federal judge blocked that attempt on 12/19/18. So the BIA's 2014 decisions which says that victims of domestic abuse are members of a particular social group for purposes of obtaining asylum stands. In February of 2019, acting AG Whitaker attempted to revive the attempt, but I haven't seen any movement on it since then.

 

In Matter of A-R-C-G- et al., 26 I&N Dec. 388 (BIA 2014), the BIA held that “married women in Guatemala who are unable to leave their relationship” is a particular social group for purposes of obtaining asylum and withholding of removal.

Edited May 2, 2019 by junkmart

[junkmart 320]

14 hours ago, theresaL said:

Here is a link to the official USCIS website pertaining to Asylum. No where does it list Domestic Abuse as a valid reason for seeking asylum. You can read for yourself.

 

https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-asylum/asylum

 

Actually, it does. In the link you posted, you'll notice that one of the bullet points if for people of a particular social group.

 

In Matter of A-R-C-G- et al., 26 I&N Dec. 388 (BIA 2014), the BIA held that “married women in Guatemala who are unable to leave their relationship” is a particular social group for purposes of obtaining asylum and withholding of removal.

Edited May 2, 2019 by junkmart

[junkmart 320]

On 4/30/2019 at 10:38 PM, guy_212 said:

Hello, I need some advice on a very important subject. My mother ran away with me from her tyrant husband and fled our home country, we came to the US. A lawyer told us that my mother has the right to seek asylum for victims of domestic abuse, as she indeed suffered from severe physical abuse from my father. My mother got divorced whilst being in the US and I’m wondering if the divorce will impact the case.

 

Any opinions/advice would be really helpful!

 

Thank youuu

 

14 hours ago, guy_212 said:

That is not the truth. Be informed before jumping to conclusions. 

I do not know if the divorce will affect the case, but you are correct that she is able to seek asylum based on a claim of domestic abuse as a person of a particular social group. This was upheld by the Board of Immigration Appeals in 2014. The Trump administration has tried, unsuccessfully, to do away with asylum based on domestic violence claims.

[junkmart 320]

14 hours ago, nastra30 said:

Hmm - domestic abuse as basis for asylum? Domestic abuse happens in every single country. So if you happen to experience domestic abuse in the US will you seek asylum in Canada or U.K?

Yes, they are considered a person of a particular social group for asylum. I suppose if a US person is badly abused enough and unable to escape their abusive situation by moving to another city or state, then it seems moving Canada or UK would be a wise decision.

Edited May 2, 2019 by junkmart

[theresaL 408]

In the ruling you linked it also includes other criteria that must be established to be included in the definition of Particular Social Group. A broad claim of DV does not in itself establish that. Of course the OP's mother certainly can file and wait and see. 

[junkmart 320]

18 minutes ago, theresaL said:

In the ruling you linked it also includes other criteria that must be established to be included in the definition of Particular Social Group. A broad claim of DV does not in itself establish that. Of course the OP's mother certainly can file and wait and see.

Naturally there are criteria for proving her case. It is a high bar to prove. Of course the broad claim of DV does not in itself establish that, but it is the first step. You've got to first make the claim, otherwise there is nothing to pursue.

You, and others, stated that domestic abuse is not a valid reason for asylum, which is not correct.

 

And let me say, I'm not saying that she has a successful case and will be granted asylum. I'm only saying that domestic abuse is still a valid reason for seeking asylum.

Edited May 2, 2019 by junkmart

[geowrian 22,335]

48 minutes ago, junkmart said:

Yes, they are considered a person of a particular social group for asylum.

"Can be". Not "are". That's a very significant difference.

The challenge is showing that you are part of that social group and the government does not provide reasonable protections for members of that group or is consenting to such actions.

 

While a federal judge blocked the AG's order to vacate the 2014 BIA ruling and updated policy regarding DV as a basis for asylum, the issue long from settled. The AG entirely has the power to vacate any BIA ruling. The issue raised by the court was that his order was essentially too broad. So it can be appealed to a higher court, or a new order by the new AG can be issued with further clarity to narrow the scope.

 

Regarding the OP's particular case, the ruling in Matter of A-R-C-G was that membership in a particular social group was satisfied because "marital status can be an immutable characteristic where the individual is unable to leave the relationship". That doesn't to apply to the OP's case because they were able to leave the relationship and divorce, therefore their marital status could not have been an immutable characteristic.

I would further note that multiple court rulings - not struck down - have asserted that the above basis is only applicable where the alien is forced to remain in the relationship.

 

Reminder that this is not legal advice. The OP's mother is free to make an asylum claim if she believes she qualifies. But she has a very steep mountain in front of her.

 

50 minutes ago, junkmart said:

I suppose if a US person is badly abused enough and unable to escape their abusive situation by moving to another city or state, then it seems moving Canada or UK would be a wise decision.

Moving an entire country away may or may not be wise. But it would be nearly impossible to do so via asylum, given that the US provides protections for a battered spouse (enforceable restraining orders, arrest and prosecution of those found to be engaging in DV, etc.).

[Boiler 43,430]

Police are “systematically failing” to protect victims of domestic and sexual violence, according to campaigners in the second super-complaint made to a national watchdog.

The Centre for Women’s Justice (CWJ) has accused police forces of failing to use existing powers to deal with domestic abuse, harassment, stalking and rape.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/mar/20/police-failing-to-protect-and-abuse-victims-says-super-complaint

 

This is from the UK media and is recent. I have not looked but I am sure I could find similar stories in the US media. So many of these protections could be theoretical rather than practical which begs the question if they would make a difference assuming we accept the basic premise.