Asylum in the United states

  Each year, thousands of people arriving at our border or already in the United States apply for asylum, a form of protection from persecution. Asylum seekers must navigate a difficult and complex process that can involve multiple government agencies. Those granted asylum can apply to live in the United States permanently and gain a path to citizenship and can also apply for their spouse and children to join them in the United States. This fact sheet provides an overview of the asylum system in the United States, including how asylum is defined, eligibility requirements, and the application process  

Washington, DC: American Immigration Council, 2022. 14p.

By The American Immigration Council

For generations, the United States has been a place of safe haven for people seeking freedom and safety. In 1980, Congress passed the Refugee Act, codifying basic refugee protections into law and enshrining a global commitment to asylum which emerged from the tragedy of the Holocaust. In the decades since then, hundreds of thousands of refugees and asylees have been granted status, strengthening communities around the nation, contributing economically, and enriching the national fabric.

But in the 21st century, a global displacement crisis is affecting nearly every country in the world. Multiple nations across the Western Hemisphere have become destabilized due to a wide variety of factors, including rising authoritarianism, political assassinations, natural disasters, powerful transnational criminal organizations, climate change, and the global socioeconomic shocks of the COVID-19 pandemic. The end result is humanitarian migration at levels far above what the 20th-century system can handle.

Presidential administrations of both parties have failed to meet this challenge. Instead of an orderly, humane, and consistent approach to humanitarian protection and border management, we have been left with a dysfunctional system that serves the needs of no one: not the government, border communities, or asylum seekers themselves.

Today, the U.S. government faces an enormous challenge. The number of asylum seekers seeking to enter each day is significantly higher than the number the United States can process at official border crossings. The location and manner of crossings varies widely across the border, often changing unpredictably based on misinformation, rumor, or the demands of powerful transnational criminal organizations which maintain control over many of the migration routes with a bloody fist. The system is constantly at risk of bottlenecks and overcrowding, building the perception of chaos at the border. And inside the United States, underfunding, neglect, and deliberate sabotage have left the adjudicatory process in shambles.

Washington, DC: American Immigration Council, 2023. 60p

By The American Immigration Council

The United States has broad authority to detain certain categories of immigrants, migrants, and others seeking humanitarian protection as their proceedings wind their way through the immigration legal system. This detention is “civil” by definition (as opposed to criminal), meaning that immigration detention should not be punitive in nature. Despite this technical legal distinction, most of the immigration detention infrastructure is indistinguishable from the criminal detention context, in some instances using the same facilities and private corporations to operate detention centers and jails. 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) states that the purpose of immigration detention is twofold: 1) to protect the wider community from those noncitizens who may pose a safety risk; and 2) to ensure that the individual will comply with any immigration proceedings (including removal). For the last two decades, there has been increasing interest in the United States and abroad to create and expand alternatives to detention for noncitizens who would otherwise be sent to immigration detention centers. This is due to an increasing understanding that detention is fundamentally harmful and inhumane—especially to immigrants of color— that there are alternatives that can achieve similar objectives to those the government is pursuing, and that there has been very little meaningful reform of immigration detention itself. For example, the current standards that govern the conditions of most immigrant detention centers, the Performance-Based National Detention Standards, were explicitly based on criminal pre-trial detention and were written in 2011, with minor updates made in 2016 and no updates in the years since then. Study after study has shown that alternatives to detention programs are generally more humane and more cost-effective than immigration detention.

Washington, DC: American Immigration Council, 2022. 9p.

By Evan J. Criddle

For generations, the United States has grappled with high levels of illegal immigration across the U.S.-Mexico border. This Article offers a novel theoretical framework to explain why legal order remains elusive at the border. Drawing inspiration from Lon Fuller’s “interactional view of law,” I argue that immigration law cannot attract compliance unless it is general, public, prospective, clear, consistent, and stable; obedience with its rules is feasible; and the law’s enforcement is congruent with the rules as enacted. The flagrant violation of any one of these principles could frustrate the development of a functional legal order. Remarkably, U.S. immigration law violates all of these principles in its treatment of asylum seekers. As the number of asylum seekers pursuing entry to the United States has risen sharply in recent years, these legality deficits have become increasingly salient. No wonder, then, that even the most aggressive deterrent measures — from mass prosecution to family separation to the construction of steel border walls — have failed to solve the United States’ border crisis. The United States faces an urgent dilemma: it may preserve the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) in its current form, denying protection to too many forced migrants and reserving broad discretion to the Executive Branch, or it may establish a functional legal order at the border. It cannot have both.

If lawmakers were serious about establishing legal order at the border, there are measures they could take to strengthen the immigration system’s structural integrity. They could eliminate the Attorney General’s discretionary authority over asylum. They could clarify ambiguities in the INA to promote greater consistency, stability, and congruence in immigration adjudication and enforcement. They could extend protection to all forced migrants who face a serious risk of death, torture, rape, or other serious harm abroad, including victims of gang violence and gender-based violence. In short, they could enact laws that asylum seekers could rationally obey. To the extent that lawmakers are unwilling to take these steps, it is fair to question their commitment to establishing a functional legal order at the border.

UC Davis Law Review, Vol. 53; 2003.

By UNODC

Trafficking in persons is a serious crime and a violation of human rights that severely impacts the lives of its victims and undermines the security and well-being of societies as a whole. As the 2020 UNODC Global Report on Trafficking in Persons confirms, trafficking in persons is widespread around the world. Whilst the crime is mostly registered as a domestic phenomenon, it also has a transnational nature, where countries can be a country of origin, transit or destination, and sometimes all three at once. Given its magnitude, quantification of the crime can be difficult, particularly given that it also affects most industries and sectors and is connected to other forms of organised crime. For this reason, solutions to address the crime can neither be isolated nor merely involving governments. The complexity of trafficking in persons requires a holistic, coordinated and multi-stakeholder effort that spans geographies and sectors. Public agencies’ interventions require a multi- agency approach, but in addition the private sector must actively engage in this fight.

Examples of how public-private partnerships can be effective in sustaining these efforts are multi- pronged. For instance, private sector companies have at their disposal a wide range of technological tools that can be used to support governments’ anti-trafficking efforts. Private companies have the capacity to identify and address cases of trafficking and exploitation in their supply chain. In that regard, the public sector might acquire new skills and additional knowledge on sustainable procurement processes, how companies identify and manage risks and the multiple forms that trafficking can take. Finally, public-private partnerships can significantly facilitate investigations to trace the financial gains or organised criminal activities such as those involving trafficking in persons.

Vienna: UNODC, 2021. 124p.

Edited by Richard C.M. Mole

Europe is a popular destination for LGBTQ people seeking to escape discrimination and persecution. Yet, while European institutions have done much to promote the legal equality of sexual minorities and a number of states pride themselves on their acceptance of sexual diversity, the image of European tolerance and the reality faced by LGBTQ migrants and asylum seekers are often quite different. To engage with these conflicting discourses, Queer Migration and Asylum in Europe brings together scholars from politics, sociology, urban studies, anthropology and law to analyse how and why queer individuals migrate to or seek asylum in Europe, as well as the legal, social and political frameworks they are forced to navigate to feel at home or to regularise their status in the destination societies. The subjects covered include LGBTQ Latino migrants’ relationship with queer and diasporic spaces in London; diasporic consciousness of queer Polish, Russian and Brazilian migrants in Berlin; the role of the Council of Europe in shaping legal and policy frameworks relating to queer migration and asylum; the challenges facing bisexual asylum seekers; queer asylum and homonationalism in the Netherlands; and the role of space, faith and LGBTQ organisations in Germany, Italy, the UK and France in supporting queer asylum seekers.

London: UCL Press, 2021. 279p.

Edited by Nancy Nicol, Adrian Jjuuko, Richard Lusimbo, Nick J. Mulé, Susan Ursel, Amar Wahab and Phyllis Waugh  

Envisioning Global LGBT Human Rights: (Neo)colonialism, Neoliberalism, Resistance and Hope is an outcome of a five-year international collaboration among partners that share a common legacy of British colonial laws that criminalise same-sex intimacy and gender identity/expression. The project sought to facilitate learning from each other and to create outcomes that would advance knowledge and social justice. The project was unique, combining research and writing with participatory documentary filmmaking. This visionary politics infuses the pages of the anthology. The chapters are bursting with invaluable first hand insights from leading activists at the forefront of some of the most fiercely fought battlegrounds of contemporary sexual politics in India, the Caribbean and Africa. As well, authors from Canada, Botswana and Kenya examine key turning points in the advancement of SOGI issues at the United Nations, and provide critical insights on LGBT asylum in Canada. Authors also speak to a need to reorient and decolonise queer studies, and turn a critical gaze northwards from the Global South. It is a book for activists and academics in a range of disciplines from postcolonial and sexualities studies to filmmaking, as well as for policy-makers and practitioners committed to envisioning, and working for, a better future.

London: University of London Press, 2018. 462p.

Edited by Veronica Federico • Simone Baglioni

This open access book discusses how, and to what extent, the legal and institutional regimes and the socio-cultural environments of a range of European countries (the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Italy, Switzerland and the UK), in the framework of EU laws and policies, have a beneficial or negative impact on the effective capacity of these countries to integrate migrants, refugees and asylum seekers into their labour markets. The analysis builds on the understanding of socio-cultural, institutional and legal factors as “barriers” or “enablers”; elements that may facilitate or obstruct the integration processes. The book examines the two dimensions of integration being access to the labour market (which, translated into a rights language means the right to work) with its corollaries (recognition of qualifications, vocational training, etc.), and non-discriminatory working conditions (which, translated into a rights language means right to both formal and substantial equality) and its corollaries of benefits and duties deriving from joining the labour market. It thereby offers a novel approach to labour market integration and migration/asylum issues given its focus on legal aspects, which includes most recent policy changes and legal decisions (including litigation cases). The robust, evidence-based and comparative research illustrated in the book provides academics and students, but also practitioners and policy makers, with up to date knowledge that will likely impact positively on policy changes needed to better address integration conundrums.

Cham: Springer Nature/Imiscoe, 2021. 264p.

Edited by Carmelo Danisi • Moira Dustin • Nuno Ferreira Nina Held

This two-volume open-access book offers a theoretically and empirically-grounded portrayal of the experiences of people claiming international protection in Europe on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity (SOGI). It shows how European asylum systems might and should treat asylum claims based on people’s SOGI in a fairer, more humane way. Through a combined comparative, interdisciplinary (socio-legal), human rights, feminist, queer and intersectional approach, this book examines not only the legal experiences of people claiming asylum on grounds of their SOGI, but also their social experiences outside the asylum decision-making framework. The authors analyse how SOGI-related claims are adjudicated in different European frameworks (European Union, Council of Europe, Germany, Italy and UK) and offer detailed recommendations to adequately address the intersectional experiences of individuals seeking asylum. This unique approach ensures that the book is of interest not only to researchers in migration and refugee studies, law and wider academic communities, but also to policy makers and practitioners in the field of SOGI asylum.

Cham: Springer Nature/Imiscoe, 2021. 497p.

Edited by Edmund S. Phelps

From the Preface: “The self-interest model has had sweeping success over recent decades in the study of both economics and politics. Yet the inner ambiguities and limitations of that model could not indefinitely escape notice and examination. Self interest in some interpretation is some of the story some of the time, never the whole story. On March 3 and 4, 1972, a number o fsocial scientists met at Russell Sage Foundation to speculate and theorize on the roles that altruism and morality in a society may play in shaping human behaviorand institutions within it. The nine papers presented at the conference are by economists. The commentaries on them were drawn from representatives of other disciplines, primarily philosophy and law. This volume is a rough. approximation to the proceedings of the conference. An introduction by the editor has been added to announce some of the main themes and to bring out some of the interrelations among the papers.”

NY. Russell Sage Foundation. 1975. 225p. CONTAINS MARK-UP

By A. G. N. Flew

FROM THE INTRODUCTION: The obvious and the right place from which to begin a study of evolutionary ethics is the work of Charles Darwin. For, primarily, it is his ideas - or what have been thought to be his ideas which advocates of evolutionary ethics or evolutionary politics have tried to apply more widely. This is not, of course, to say that Darwin hadn ointellectual ancestors; any more than it is to suggest that biological theory has since his death stood still. To say or to suggest either thing would be absurdly wrong…”

NY. St. Martinn’s Press. 1967. 78p. CONTAINS MARK-UP

By Michael Polanyi

From Chapter 1: “What is the nature of science? Given any amount of experience, can scientific propositions be derived from it by the application of some explicit rules of procedure? Let us limit ourselves for the sake of simplicity to the exact sciences and conveniently assume that all relevant experience is given us in the form of numerical measurements; so that we are presented with a list of figures representing positions, masses, times, velocities, wavelengths, etc., from which we have t oderive some mathematical law of nature. Could we do that by the applicationo f definite operations? Certainly not….”

Chicago And London. The University Of Chicago Press. 1946. 95p. CONTAINS MARK-UP

By John Bowlby

From the Preface: I first became interested in Charles Darwin as a personality, and as a scientist and invalid, thirty years ago when I read the new and complete version of his Autohiography, edited by hisgranddaughter, Nora Barlow. In it, amongst much else, he makes brief reference to the chronic ill-health from which he suffered over many years and the nature of which, I knew, hadfor long been a subject of controversy, the major issue being whether his symptoms were caused by an organic illness or were of emotional origin. At the time, I was working on the psychological il-effects that are apt to follow a childhood bereavement and so, when I learned that Darwin's mother had died when he was eight years old, I began to wonder whether that might have played some part in the genesis ofhis troubles. Alittle later, when the medical controversy erupted again, I made a brief contribution raising the issue. Having many other commitments at the time,I was unable to pursue the idea further, though Thoped it might one day be possible…”

NY. W. W. Norton. 1990. 511p. CONTAINS MARK-UP

By Murray Gell-Mann

From the Preface: “…The book is divided into four parts. At the beginningof the first part, I describe some personal experiences that led me to write it. Taking long walks in tropical forests, studying birds, and planning nature conservation activities, I became excited by the idea of sharing with readers my growing awareness of the links between the fundamental laws of physics and the world we see around us. All my life I have loved exploring the realm of living things, but my professional life has been devoted mostly to research on the fundamental laws. These laws underlie all of science (in a sense that is discussed in this book) but often seem far removed from most experience, including a great deal of experience in the other sciences. Reflecting on questions of simplicity and complexity, we perceive connections that help to link together all the phenomena of nature, from the simplest to the most complex…”

London. Little, Brown and Company. 1994. 386p. CONTAINS MARK-UP

Edited by Tim Causer

Among the vast body of manuscripts composed and collected by the philosopher and reformer Jeremy Bentham (1748 - 1832), held by UCL Library's Special Collections, is the earliest Australian convict narrative, Memorandoms by James Martin. This document also happens to be the only extant first-hand account of the most well-known, and most mythologized, escape from Australia by transported convicts. On the night of 28 March 1791, James Martin, William and Mary Bryant and their two infant children, and six other male convicts, stole the colony's fishing boat and sailed out of Sydney Harbour. Within ten weeks they had reached Kupang in West Timor, having, in an amazing feat of endurance, travelled over 3,000 miles (c. 5,000) kilometres) in an open boat. There they passed themselves off as the survivors of a shipwreck, a ruse which-initially, at least-fooled their Dutch hosts. This new edition of the Memorandoms includes full colour reproductions of the original manuscripts, making available for the first time this hugely important document, alongside a transcript with commentary describing the events and key characters. The book also features a scholarly introduction which examines their escape and early convict absconding in New South Wales more generally, and, drawing on primary records, presents new research which sheds light on the fate of the escapees after they reached Kupang. The introduction also assesses the voluminous literature on this most famous escape, and critically examines the myths and fictions created around it and the escapees, myths which have gone unchallenged for far too long. Finally, the introduction briefly discusses Jeremy Bentham's views on convict transportation and their enduring impact. [Show full item record]

London: UCL Press, 2017. 204p.

Edited by Marina Gržinić

Border Thinking: Disassembling Histories of Racialized Violence aims to question and provide answers to current border issues in Europe. Central to this investigation is a refugee crisis that is primarily a crisis of global Western capitalism and its components: modernization, nationalism, structural racism, dispossession, and social, political, and economic violence. In this volume, these notions and conditions are connected with the concept of borders, which seems to have disappeared as a function of the global neoliberal economy but is palpably reappearing again and again through deportations, segregations, and war. How can we think about these relations in an open way, beyond borders? Is it possible to develop border thinking for a radical transformation, as a means to revolutionize the state of things? To do this, we must reconsider what is possible for the social and the political as well as for art and culture.

Berlin: Sternberg Press, 2018. 307p.

Edited by Birgit Glorius • Jeroen Doomernik  

This open access book describes how the numerous arrivals of asylum seekers since 2015 shaped reception and integration processes in Europe. It addresses the structuration of asylum and reception systems, and spaces and places of reception on European, national, regional and local level. It also analyses perceptions and discourses on asylum and refugees, their evolvement and the consequences for policy development. Furthermore, it examines practices and policy developments in the field of refugee reception and integration. The volume shows and explains a variety of refugee reception and integration strategies and practices as specific outcome of multilevel governance processes in Europe. By addressing and contextualizing those multiple experiences of asylum seeker reception, the book is a valuable contribution to the literature on migration and integration, societal development and political culture in Europe.

Cham, SWIT: IMISCOE/Springer Open, 2020. 268p.

Edited by Tatiana Bazzichelli

The courageous acts of whistleblowing that inspired the world over the past few years have changed our perception of surveillance and control in today's information society. But what are the wider effects of whistleblowing as an act of dissent on politics, society, and the arts? How does it contribute to new courses of action, digital tools, and contents? This urgent intervention based on the work of Berlin's Disruption Network Lab examines this growing phenomenon, offering interdisciplinary pathways to empower the public by investigating whistleblowing as a developing political practice that has the ability to provoke change from within.

Bielefeld: transcript Verlag, 2021. 377p.

By Michelle Castañeda 

Michelle Castañeda lays bare the criminalization of race enacted every day in U.S. immigration courts and detention centers in order to reimagine alternatives to the deportation regimes.

Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2023. 199p.

Edited by Anna Mratschkowski

Asylum and refugees in Europe – who can fix a broken system? In times of increasing waves of migration, collective bodies and their cooperation networks are of particular importance to the European asylum system. But who are those actors and what is their contribution to effecting a change in the situation of those seeking refuge in Europe? While the Common European Asylum System introduced standardised regulations for all EU-member states, the real situation in each country differs greatly from those official declarations, even leading to a humanitarian crisis at times. Using the theory of neo-institutionalism, current data from expert interviews, and website and document analyses from Italy, Spain, Greece, Cyprus, Malta and Germany, this study answers those questions. It illustrates how and if this gap between talk and action can be narrowed, how asylum-related organisations and their networks function and how far they contribute to this process.

Germany: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG 2017. 225p,