为什么在重新定义难民法中特定社会群体的定义时需要最高法院的指导

Liliya Paraketsova
{"title":"为什么在重新定义难民法中特定社会群体的定义时需要最高法院的指导","authors":"Liliya Paraketsova","doi":"10.36646/mjlr.51.2.why","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One of the most debated topics in refugee law has been the meaning of particular social group (PSG)—one of the five categories used to claim refugee status. In 2006, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) adopted a narrower PSG definition. Since that adoption, a circuit split has persisted over the meaning of PSG. Two circuits in particular have continually refused to adopt this definition—even when the BIA attempted to revise the definition in response to their criticism. This Note proposes a reform that would include a compromise between the two current definitions of PSG by rejecting the BIA’s particularity requirement and transforming the social distinction requirement into a flexible standard. Further, this Note advises that the Supreme Court provide guidance to the BIA to ensure that all jurisdictions adhere to the new definition.","PeriodicalId":83420,"journal":{"name":"University of Michigan journal of law reform. University of Michigan. Law School","volume":"48 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why Guidance from the Supreme Court is Required in Redefining the Particular Social Group Definition in Refugee Law\",\"authors\":\"Liliya Paraketsova\",\"doi\":\"10.36646/mjlr.51.2.why\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"One of the most debated topics in refugee law has been the meaning of particular social group (PSG)—one of the five categories used to claim refugee status. In 2006, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) adopted a narrower PSG definition. Since that adoption, a circuit split has persisted over the meaning of PSG. Two circuits in particular have continually refused to adopt this definition—even when the BIA attempted to revise the definition in response to their criticism. This Note proposes a reform that would include a compromise between the two current definitions of PSG by rejecting the BIA’s particularity requirement and transforming the social distinction requirement into a flexible standard. Further, this Note advises that the Supreme Court provide guidance to the BIA to ensure that all jurisdictions adhere to the new definition.\",\"PeriodicalId\":83420,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"University of Michigan journal of law reform. University of Michigan. Law School\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"University of Michigan journal of law reform. University of Michigan. Law School\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36646/mjlr.51.2.why\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Michigan journal of law reform. University of Michigan. Law School","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36646/mjlr.51.2.why","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

难民法中最具争议的话题之一是特殊社会群体(PSG)的含义,这是用来申请难民身份的五个类别之一。2006年,移民上诉委员会(BIA)通过了一个更窄的PSG定义。自从PSG被采用以来,关于PSG的含义一直存在分歧。特别是有两个电路一直拒绝采用这一定义——即使在BIA试图修改定义以回应他们的批评时也是如此。本文提出了一项改革,其中包括通过拒绝BIA的特殊性要求和将社会区别要求转变为灵活的标准,在目前两种PSG定义之间进行妥协。此外,本说明建议最高法院向BIA提供指导,以确保所有司法管辖区都遵守新定义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Why Guidance from the Supreme Court is Required in Redefining the Particular Social Group Definition in Refugee Law
One of the most debated topics in refugee law has been the meaning of particular social group (PSG)—one of the five categories used to claim refugee status. In 2006, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) adopted a narrower PSG definition. Since that adoption, a circuit split has persisted over the meaning of PSG. Two circuits in particular have continually refused to adopt this definition—even when the BIA attempted to revise the definition in response to their criticism. This Note proposes a reform that would include a compromise between the two current definitions of PSG by rejecting the BIA’s particularity requirement and transforming the social distinction requirement into a flexible standard. Further, this Note advises that the Supreme Court provide guidance to the BIA to ensure that all jurisdictions adhere to the new definition.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A System Out of Balance: A Critical Analysis of Philosophical Justifications for Copyright Law Through the Lenz of Users' Rights Giving the Fourth Amendment Meaning: Creating an Adversarial Warrant Proceeding to Protect From Unreasonable Searches and Seizures Private Caregiver Presumption For Elder Caregivers The Short Unhappy Life of the Negotiation Class Former Whistleblowers: Why the False Claims Act's Anti-Retaliation Provision Should Protect Former Employees
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1