By Immigration Attorney Natalia Segermeister of The Visa Firm of Price Benowitz LLP.
Early in June, Attorney General Jeff Sessions made a decision on a case of an asylum seeker that broke U.S. precedent and violated international law.
The case Sessions ordered an immigration judge to deny was called Matter of A-B-, and it overruled a previous decision on a case called Matter of A-R-C-G-.
In the Matter of A-B- case, a woman from Guatemala was seeking asylum from the husband who had raped, beaten and burned her throughout the course of their marriage. After finding herself unable to leave him in Guatemala, she hoped seeking asylum in the United States would provide the protection she needed.
In the past, victims of domestic violence could apply for asylum in the U.S. if their own governments failed to protect them. In many cases, they were granted that asylum. But this landmark decision has overruled not just one case, but thousands that find themselves in the same unfortunate situation.
Due to the fact that precedent was broken and that Sessions no longer allows those left unprotected from entering the United States, it has been said that he is in violation of international law.
“Our immigration system unfortunately gives the Attorney General unilateral power in these cases,” says Asylum Lawyer Natalia Segermeister of the Visa Firm of Price Benowitz LLP. “It is a very serious matter that could deny help to those that need it the most.”
In addition to overruling the case, Sessions has also stated that asylum seekers are not leaving their countries because they face persecution, but simply because the immigration laws in the United States are so relaxed. That has never been true, and such assertions are justification for ignoring protections enshrined in international treaties and adopted in U.S. immigration laws.
After the decision was made, Sessions stated that one decision did not mean that those facing persecution from gang and domestic violence would never be able to seek asylum within the United States.
For the time being however, it seems clear that this latest ruling will affect tens of thousands asylum claims made by people trying to flee violent situations in which their home country is unwilling or unable to protect them.
