Immigration Law
Mali Woman Presses Asylum Request Based on Genital Mutilation
Posted Nov 5, 2007, 09:17 am CST
By Debra Cassens Weiss
A Mali woman is asking the Board of Immigration Appeals to reconsider a ruling denying her asylum even though she had been subjected to female genital mutilation and would likely be forced to marry her first cousin if she returned home.
The board said the concerns of petitioner Alima Traore were understandable, but the cutting procedure has not been identified as a basis for asylum under immigration law, Adam Liptak reports in his Sidebar column for the New York Times. The board said in its Sept. 27 decision (PDF posted by the New York Times) that because the cutting could not be repeated, it could not be the basis of a “well-founded fear of persecution.”
The board also said the forced marriage claim was insufficient. “We do not see how the reluctant acceptance of family tradition over personal preference can form the basis” for asylum, the opinion said.
The board rejected the reasoning of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which granted asylum to a woman from Somalia because she had undergone the cutting procedure, which makes sex painful. The appeals court noted in its opinion (PDF posted by the New York Times) that the procedure causes long-term health consequences, as does forced sterilization. The latter procedure is a ground for asylum, even though it cannot be repeated.
Related Stories
- CIS Chief Counsel Says Policy Change Helped Stem Litigation Tide
Nov 26, 2008, 12:15 pm CST - Layoffs at Big Immigration Boutique; Fragomen Says Hiring to Be Curtailed
Nov 21, 2008, 04:43 pm CST - Court Interpreter Shortages Worsen, Especially for Rare Languages
Nov 20, 2008, 01:15 pm CST - AG Asks Whether Potential Deportees Have Right to Effective Lawyers
Oct 30, 2008, 06:13 am CST
Related Topics
Commenting has expired on this post.
Comments
Posted by Jay - 1 year, 3 weeks, 5 days, 6 hours, 15 minutes ago
It certainly is bothersome that so many other cultures are made up of backwards and uncivilized individuals (which is what the 9th Cir. is inherently arguing). But can the United States really provide shelter to billions of people? Don’t we WANT those people who are levelheaded and somewhat evolved to remain in their home countries so that they might fix problems there? It’s a cultural brain drain, and in the long run asylum policies probably do more harm than good.
Posted by Matthew Kolken - 1 year, 2 weeks, 6 days, 8 hours, 50 minutes ago
Immigration Judges regularly deny FGM based asylum cases even in situations where the woman has not had this barbaric practice inflicted upon them, and fear that they will be mutilated if they are forced to return to their native country.
Unfortunately, there is a huge disparity among Immigration Judge’s throughout the country and in most cases your chances of winning asylum are more about what Judge you are in front of then the merits of your case.