Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 19, 2024 Fri
Time: 4:39 am
Time: 4:39 am
Results for asylum
12 results foundAuthor: Simpson, Gerry Title: Welcome to Kenya: Police Abuse of Somali Refugees Summary: Near Kenya's officially closed border with Somalia, abusive police intercept thousands of mostly women and children asylum seekers fleeing war-torn Somalia every month. Using the clandestine nature of their journey as an excuse to extort and abuse them, police beat and, in some cases, rape them, and deport or detain those who don't pay on false charges of unlawful presence in Kenya. In early 2010, hundreds, if not thousands, of Somalis unable to pay were unlawfully sent back to Somalia. Once in the camps, which only 3 percent of refugees were allowed to leave in 2009, they face further police violence. Police also fail to investigate sexual violence against refugees by other refugees and Kenyan nationals in the camps, leading to a climate of impunity for those responsible. The abuses are the direct result of the country's border closure and the related closure of a refugee transit center near the border which used to provide a safe place where most Somalis first sought refuge in Kenya and from where the United Nations previously transported them to camps. Without this transit center, Somalis have become fair game for corrupt police. This report outlines concrete steps Kenya should take to end the abuses and to proactively prevent and respond to sexual violence in the camps. It also calls on the UN refugee agency to improve its monitoring of abuses and to increase its advocacy with the authorities to end them. Details: New York: Human Rights Watch, 2010. 94p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2010 Country: Kenya URL: Shelf Number: 119109 Keywords: AliensAsylumPolice CorruptionRapeRefugeesSexual AssaultSexual Violence |
Author: Amnesty International Title: Amnesty International Australia Detention Facilities Visit 2012, Findings and recommendations Summary: The initial findings of Amnesty International’s recent detention centre visits, reiterate the organisation’s long held position that the indefinite and prolonged detention of asylum seekers in Australia is a failed policy that contravenes human rights standards. The most serious and damaging conditions faced by asylum seekers in immigration detention are the length of time and the indefinite nature of their imprisonment. Among the asylum seekers who had been in detention for extended periods, self harm and attempted suicides were talked about as a fact of life. The use of sleeping pills and other medication was also widespread. The Christmas Island Northwest Point Immigration Detention Centre (IDC) is overwhelmingly and unacceptably prison-like. The facility is too harsh to house people who have not committed a crime. Adding to the restrictive environment is the new behaviour management regime in the White compound. The Curtin IDC in Western Australia should be immediately closed for immigration detention purposes. The remote and isolated location of the centre, as well as the extremely hot and dusty physical conditions, exacerbates the existing problems with detaining asylum seekers. Findings documented from Perth IDC, Northern IDC, Wickham Point IDC, Phosphate Hill APOD and Darwin Airport Lodge APODs 1, 2 and 3, are all illustrative of a failed system. Given the human rights abuses inherent in indefnite detention, and the excessive costs of transporting basic infrastructure, supplies and staff to such extremely inaccessible locations, Amnesty International remains appalled that this policy has continued for so long. Details: Australia: Amnesty International, 2012. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 28, 2012 at http://www.amnesty.org.au/images/uploads/news/Amnesty-International-Australia-DetentionFacilitiesVisit-2012-FINAL.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: http://www.amnesty.org.au/images/uploads/news/Amnesty-International-Australia-DetentionFacilitiesVisit-2012-FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 124310 Keywords: AsylumDetention FacilitiesEvaluative StudiesImmigrants |
Author: Australia. Commonwealth Ombudsman Title: Christmas Island immigration detention facilities: Report on the Commonwealth and Immigration Ombudsman's oversight of immigration processes on Christmas Island October 2008 to September 2010 Summary: In September 2008, the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship requested, and the Commonwealth Ombudsman agreed, to take on an oversight role of the non statutory refugee assessment process for asylum seekers at the Christmas Island immigration detention facilities. Ombudsman staff have since made eight visits to the Christmas Island immigration detention facilities and have observed all the processes conducted from the time asylum seekers are brought to the wharf at Flying Fish Cove until their refugee status is determined, and they are advised that the Minister will allow them to apply for a visa or that they are likely to be removed from Australia. When visiting the island, Ombudsman staff have also taken the opportunity to undertake inspections of the immigration detention facilities and accept complaints from detainees. In the period since our first visit in October 2008, there have been many changes affecting the processing of asylum seekers and the circumstances of the people detained on the island. Most obviously the number of people passing through the non-statutory process has grown significantly and this has adversely affected conditions of detention. In October 2008 there were only 31 people in detention. In June 2010, 2454 people were detained on Christmas Island, including 270 children. By 1 September 2010, this had further increased to 2603, significantly exceeding the detention capacity by more than 500 people. The challenge that management of the Christmas Island detention facilities has posed for the Department of Immigration and Citizenship should not be underestimated. Impressions taken from our initial visit in October 2008 were that whilst the Department was clear about its own objectives, the planning process may not have given sufficient attention to co-ordination with and between other agencies, as well as internal to the Department itself. However, our office’s experience has been that the Department has been responsive to comments made in the reports we have provided to them after each visit and been willing to accept advice, learn from mistakes and make improvements. We have observed and made in all six recommendations on a number of issues core to the effective and appropriate operation of the Christmas Island detention facilities. Additional to improving cooperation and communication amongst agencies, we made recommendations to DIAC for a thorough review of the non-statutory Refugee Status Assessment (RSA) process as well as the processes for relocation of persons with a positive assessment to more appropriate community detention. Recommendation is also made on the appropriate numbers and use of interpreters, which has over time been a matter contributing to anxiety amongst detainees. The vexing issue of unaccompanied minors or families with children is one of key concern to this office. The Ombudsman welcomes recent announcements about changed procedures that will facilitate processing of their claims on the Australian mainland. It is our office’s view that pending the outcome of RSA claims and security clearances, that they (families and children) should be placed in community detention. The Ombudsman’s office has noted the clearance of the heavy backlog of torture and trauma cases requiring professional attention. Nevertheless, with the increasing number of detainees, tremendous pressure remains on the facilities and resources available at the Christmas Island detention facilities. Our office continues to receive complaints about a variety of issues, including processing delays and detention times, and the lack of services and facilities. We have recommended the expedition of movement of detainees to the Australian mainland so as to address overcrowding, as well as the need to address the shortage of facilities and services, in particular mental health services. Based on observations during the past two years, Ombudsman considers that the Department has on the whole managed the operation as well or better than could be expected. However, the Ombudsman considers that the stage has been reached where the current scale of operations on Christmas Island is not sustainable. At the time of this report, people detained at the Christmas Island detention facilities were 2757, a further increase from that in September 2010 and in excess of the operation’s Contingency Accommodation Capacity (CAC) of 2584. The Christmas Island detention facilities have a nominal operation capacity of 744. Simply put, there are too many people detained at the combined Christmas Island immigration detention facilities. Whether the solution is to make use of facilities on the Australian mainland is a policy decision for Government to make. However, the Ombudsman is concerned that attempting to manage more facilities by utilising the existing level of resources in geographically diverse areas potentially brings with it other problems not least of which is ensuring the presence of adequate infrastructure and mental health services. Details: Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth Ombudsman, 2011. 23p. Source: Report No. 02-2011: Internet Resource: Accessed March 20, 2012 at http://www.ombudsman.gov.au/files/christmas_island_immigration_detention_facilities_report.pdf Year: 2011 Country: Australia URL: http://www.ombudsman.gov.au/files/christmas_island_immigration_detention_facilities_report.pdf Shelf Number: 124588 Keywords: AsylumDetention Facilities (Australia)Immigration Detention (Australia)Refugees |
Author: Rabin, Nina Title: At the Border between Public and Private: U.S. Immigration Policy for Victims of Domestic Violence Summary: This paper is an examination of the treatment of women in flight from domestic violence at the U.S. Mexico border. It compares the robust state protections and institutional framework for women victims of domestic violence in the interior of the country with the hostile landscape women encounter at the border. The paper draws on three sources for information about the treatment at the border of domestic violence victims: an in-depth case study of one woman’s experience of domestic violence and flight, a small data set of women who fled domestic violence and were detained in Eloy Detention Center in Arizona during 2010 and 2011, and a detailed analysis of the policies and practices at play when a woman in flight from domestic violence comes to the U.S. border. The case study, data sample, and policy analysis paint a grim picture that may surprise many. Women fleeing violence whose lives entangle with the border confront a bureaucracy and a justice system that harkens back to the time, fifty years ago, when domestic violence was seen as a private matter about which there was little the government could or should do to respond. Most often, women are immediately turned around and sent back to the abuse without any opportunity to explain their terror. If they do voice their fear, they are often locked up in detention centers for months and sometimes years at a time. In the majority of cases, after this prolonged incarceration, they are deported back to the abuse from which they fled. The U.S. immigration policies and practices that lead to these results are not only failing to respond to these victims’ harms; they are actually exacerbating their trauma and isolation, often sending them back to a more dangerous situation than the one they originally fled. Building on this descriptive account, the paper analyzes whether there is sound justification for the differential treatment immigrant women victims of domestic violence receive at the border as compared to in the interior of the country. A closer look at the treatment of immigrant victims of domestic violence in the interior reveals that they receive state protection and assistance so long as they are conceived of solely in terms of their victimization. Inevitably, when their status as victims becomes intertwined with their status as undocumented immigrants, the state’s commitment to robust protection and assistance weakens. What is unique at the geographic border, however, is the ways in which these anxieties about admissions are cloaked in language about the “private” nature of the violence at issue for women in flight from domestic violence. This use of the public/private distinction to express underlying concerns about immigration admissions policies is disturbing on two counts: it fails to discuss transparently the considerations at issue and it minimizes the deep structural roots of domestic violence no matter where it occurs. Details: Tucson, AZ: James E. Rogers College of Law, University of Arizona, 2012. 58p. Source: Internet Resource: Draft Paper: Accessed July 2, 2012 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2084363 Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2084363 Shelf Number: 125457 Keywords: AsylumDomestic ViolenceDomestic Violence (U.S.)Immigrant DetentionImmigrantsViolence Against Women |
Author: U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor Title: Issue Paper: Youth Gang Organizations in El Salvador Summary: This Issue Paper was drafted by the Department of State’s Office of Asia and Western Hemisphere Affairs in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor for use by the Executive Office of Immigration Review and the Department of Homeland Security in assessing asylum claims.a It is intended to provide a convenient, updated summary regarding gang organizations in El Salvador.b Under 8 C.F.R. 208.11 and 1208.11, the Department of State may provide information on country conditions that may be pertinent to the adjudication of asylum claims.c The purpose of this issue paper is to present information relating to such conditions;d it is not intended to convey a description of all of the possible circumstances from which legitimate asylum claims may arise. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of State, 2007. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 22, 2013 Year: 2007 Country: El Salvador URL: Shelf Number: 129136 Keywords: 18th Street GangAsylumMara SalvatruchaViolenceYouth Gangs (El Salvador) |
Author: Spinks, Harriet Title: Destination Anywhere? Factors affecting asylum seekers' choice of destination country Summary: - At the end of 2011 there were over 16 million refugees and asylum seekers worldwide. By far the majority of these are hosted in the developing world, close to the refugee-producing hotspots. However significant numbers do make their way to developed countries to apply for asylum. - In the context of increasing numbers of asylum seekers arriving in Australia by boat in recent years, there has been much debate about the impact of certain policy measures on numbers of arrivals, and the relative significance of 'pull' versus 'push' factors in influencing the rate of arrivals. - There is a growing body of research (albeit largely from outside Australia) into the issue of asylum destination choice - that is, the extent to which asylum seekers are able to exercise choice when it comes to their destination country, and their reasons for choosing certain countries over others. - This research reveals a number of common themes, chief among them being that asylum seekers generally have limited options available to them, and choices are made within a very narrow field of possibilities. Their choices and their journeys are often strongly influenced by the people smugglers, or agents, they engage to assist them. - Where asylum seekers are able to exercise choice in determining their destination country, factors such as the presence of social networks, historical ties between the countries of origin and destination, and the knowledge or belief that a certain country is democratic, where human rights and the rule of law are likely to be respected, are highly influential. - Policies and processes relating to the asylum procedure in destination countries are generally not well known and therefore not highly significant in influencing choice of destination. This represents a major challenge for governments which are attempting to curb flows of asylum seekers through changes to asylum policy. Details: Canberra: Parliament of Australia, 2013. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Paper no. 1, 2012-13: Accessed July 16, 2014 at: http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/library/prspub/2209855/upload_binary/2209855.pdf;fileType=application/pdf Year: 2013 Country: International URL: http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/library/prspub/2209855/upload_binary/2209855.pdf;fileType=application/pdf Shelf Number: 132683 Keywords: AsylumHuman SmugglingHuman TraffickingRefugees |
Author: All Party Parliamentary Group on Refugees Title: The Report of the Inquiry into the Use of Immigration Detention in the United Kingdom Summary: In July 2014, the All Party Parliamentary Group on Refugees and the All Party Parliamentary Group on Migration launched an inquiry into the use of immigration detention in the UK. The inquiry was held as a joint inquiry as the topic of immigration detention crosses the remits of both groups. The inquiry was formed following a number of high profile incidents within Immigration Removal Centres and amid plans to increase the size of the detention estate. The topic of detention has occasionally been the subject of debate within Parliament and has, in part, been covered by select committees in the past. However, the panel members were mindful that what scrutiny there has been has usually been narrowly focused and there was a need for a wider piece of work looking at the whole operation. The panel identified that an inquiry into the use of detention within the immigration and asylum systems was required. A call for written evidence was issued on July 17 2014 with a deadline of October 1 2014. The call for evidence asked for submissions regarding the conditions within detention centres, the impact on individuals and their families, the financial and social consequences of detention, and the future use of detention within the immigration and asylum system. This report is the result of that inquiry. Details: London: All Party Parliamentary Group on Refugees, 2015. 76p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 9, 2015 at: https://detentioninquiry.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/immigration-detention-inquiry-report.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://detentioninquiry.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/immigration-detention-inquiry-report.pdf Shelf Number: 134755 Keywords: AsylumIllegal Immigrants (U.K.) Immigrant Detention Immigration Immigration Policy |
Author: Kandel, William A. Title: Unaccompanied Alien Children: Potential Factors Contributing to Recent Immigration Summary: Since FY2008, the growth in the number of unaccompanied alien children (UAC) from Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras seeking to enter the United States has increased substantially. Total unaccompanied child apprehensions increased from about 8,000 in FY2008 to 52,000 in the first 8 1/2 months of FY2014. Since 2012, children from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras (Central America's "northern triangle") account for almost all of this increase. Apprehension trends for these three countries are similar and diverge sharply from those for Mexican children. Unaccompanied child migrants' motives for migrating to the United States are often multifaceted and difficult to measure analytically. Four recent out-migration-related factors distinguishing northern triangle Central American countries are high violent crime rates, poor economic conditions fueled by relatively low economic growth rates, high rates of poverty, and the presence of transnational gangs. In 2012, the homicide rate per 100,000 inhabitants stood at 90.4 in Honduras (the highest in the world), 41.2 in El Salvador, and 39.9 in Guatemala. International Monetary Fund reports show economic growth rates in the northern triangle countries in 2013 ranging from 1.6% to 3.5%, relatively low compared with other Central American countries. About 45% of Salvadorans, 55% of Guatemalans, and 67% of Hondurans live in poverty. Surveys in 2013 indicate that almost half of all unaccompanied children experienced serious harm or threats by organized criminal groups or state actors, and one-fifth experienced domestic abuse. In 2011, Mexico passed legislation to improve migration management and ensure the rights of migrants transiting the country. According to many migration experts, implementation of the laws has been uneven. Some have questioned whether passage of such legislation has affected in some way the recent flows of unaccompanied children. However, the impact of such laws remains unclear. Although economic opportunity may motivate some unaccompanied children to migrate to the United States, labor market conditions for low-skilled minority youth have worsened in recent years, even as industrial sectors employing low-skilled workers enjoy improved economic prospects. Educational opportunities may also provide a motivating factor to migration as perceptions of free and safe education may be widespread among the young. Family reunification is reported to be one of the key motives of unaccompanied children. Many have family members among the sizable Salvadoran, Guatemalan, and Honduran foreign-born populations residing in the United States. While the impacts of actual and perceived U.S. immigration policies have been widely debated, it remains unclear if, and how, specific immigration policies have motivated children to migrate to the United States. Misperceptions about U.S. policies may be a contributing factor. The existence of long-standing humanitarian relief policies confounds causal links between them and the recent surge in unaccompanied children. A notable and recent exception is revised humanitarian relief provisions for unaccompanied children included in the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) of 2008, which affects asylum claims, trafficking victim protections, and eligibility for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status. Some argue that unaccompanied children and their families falsely believe they would be covered under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) initiative and legalization provisions in proposed comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) legislation. Details: Washington, DC: Congressional Research Services, 2014. 25p. Source: Internet Resource: R43628: Accessed March 12, 2016 at: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R43628.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R43628.pdf Shelf Number: 138183 Keywords: AsylumChild Protection Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)Illegal Immigrants Illegal Immigration Immigrant Detention ImmigrationUnaccompanied Alien Children |
Author: Human Rights Watch Title: Closed Doors: Mexico's Failure to Protect Central American Refugee and Migrant Children Summary: Tens of thousands of children flee Central America's Northern Triangle - El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras - each year, on their own or with family members, because they have been pressured to join local gangs, threatened with sexual violence and exploitation, held for ransom, subjected to extortion, or suffer domestic violence. Mexican law provides for refugee protection for children and adults who face persecution or other threats to their lives and safety in their home countries. Even so, less than 1 percent of the children who are apprehended by Mexican immigration authorities are recognized as refugees. Closed Doors examines the reasons for this gulf between the need for protection and Mexico's low refugee recognition rates, detailing the formidable obstacles children face in even applying for recognition. Immigration agents frequently fail to inform them of their rights and do not adequately screen them for possible refugee claims. They do not receive state-appointed lawyers or other government assistance in preparing applications for refugee recognition. More dauntingly, most are held in prison-like conditions, leading many children to accept deportation to avoid protracted time in detention. The report concludes with specific steps Mexico should take to address these shortcomings. Mexican authorities should ensure that children have effective access to refugee recognition procedures and end immigration detention of children; and they should provide appropriate care and protection for unaccompanied migrant children by identifying the housing arrangements that are most consistent with their best interests. Details: New York: HRW, 2016. 164p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 7, 2016 at: https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/mexico0316web_0.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Mexico URL: https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/mexico0316web_0.pdf Shelf Number: 139305 Keywords: AsylumHuman RightsImmigrant ChildrenImmigrationRefugeesUnaccompanied Children |
Author: Carrera, Sergio Title: The European Border and Coast Guard: Addressing migration and asylum challenges in the Mediterranean? Summary: The humanitarian refugee crisis in Europe of 2015-2016 has revealed several unfinished elements and shortcomings in current EU policies and approaches to migration, asylum and borders, particularly those applying in southern EU maritime borders and frontier states in the Mediterranean. This book provides a critical examination of the main issues and lessons learned from this crisis and gives an up-to-date assessment of the main policy, legal and institutional responses that have been put in place at the EU level. It further examines the extent to which these responses can be expected to work under the current system of sharing responsibilities among EU member states in assessing asylum applications and ensuring a consistent implementation of EU legal standards that comply with the rule of law and fundamental rights. This report is based on original research and draws upon the existing literature, along with the discussions of a CEPS Task Force that met over six months, under the chairmanship of Enrico Letta, President of the Jacques Delors Institute, Dean of the Paris School of International Affairs (PSIA) at Sciences Po and former Prime Minister of Italy. The rapporteurs offer specific recommendations and possible scenarios for policy optimisation and assess the extent to which the establishment of a European Border and Asylum Service (EBAS) could address the current gaps and challenges in EU and member states' migration policies. Details: Brussels: The Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), 2016. 74p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 4, 2017 at: https://www.ceps.eu/system/files/TFR%20EU%20Border%20and%20Coast%20Guard%20with%20cover_0.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Europe URL: https://www.ceps.eu/system/files/TFR%20EU%20Border%20and%20Coast%20Guard%20with%20cover_0.pdf Shelf Number: 145880 Keywords: AsylumBorder SecurityImmigration EnforcementImmigration PolicyRefugees |
Author: Lasch, Christopher N. Title: Understanding "Sanctuary Cities" Summary: In the wake of Trump's election, a growing number of local jurisdictions around the country have sought to disentangle their criminal justice system from federal immigration enforcement initiatives. These localities have embraced a series of reforms that protect immigrants from deportation when they come into contact with the criminal justice system. In response, President Trump and his administration have labeled these jurisdictions "sanctuary cities" and promised to "end" them by cutting off federal funding. This Article is a collaborative project authored by law professors specializing in the intersection between immigration and criminal law. In it, we set forth the central features of the Trump administration's mass deportation plans and his recently-announced campaign to "crack down" on "sanctuary cities." We then outline the diverse ways in which localities have sought to protect their residents from deportation by refusing to participate in the Trump immigration agenda. Such initiatives include limiting compliance with immigration detainers, precluding participation in joint operations with the federal government, and preventing immigration agents from accessing local jails. Finally, we analyze the legal and policy justifications for sanctuary that local jurisdictions have advanced with increasing intensity since Trump's election. These insights have important implications for how sanctuary cities are understood and preserved in the age of Trump. As a complement to this Article, we have created a public online library of sanctuary policies that includes all the policies cited here and many more we considered in our research. Details: Forthcoming in 58 BOSTON COLLEGE LAW REVIEW (2018). 62p. Source: Internet Resource: UCLA School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 17-33 New England Law|Boston Research Paper No. 18-02: Accessed February 6, 2018 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3045527 Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3045527 Shelf Number: 149009 Keywords: AsylumCrimigrationIllegal ImmigrantsImmigration EnforcementImmigration PolicySanctuary CitiesUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Hong, Kari E. Title: Weaponizing Misery: The Twenty-Year Attack on Asylum Summary: The Trump Administration is attacking asylum seekers - both in words and in deeds. In Attorney General Sessions's speech against "dirty immigration lawyers", for whom he blames for the rampant "fraud and abuse" in the system, the Attorney General highlighted policy initiatives undertaken by the Trump Administration to deter, delay, and deny asylum applicants who are seeking protections. This Article identifies the Trump administration's new policies and practices and criticizes those that impose irrational or unnecessary burdens on asylum seekers. More salient, however, is that the Trump Administration's attack on asylum is not a break from past practices. To the contrary, for over 20 years, the preceding three administrations have imposed significant burdens on asylum seekers, because they either caved to irrational political pressures or lacked the political will to protect those who need more. Change is needed and concrete policy reforms exist. But the precondition to reform is the recognition that many newly-arriving immigrants who are poor and persecuted, ironically, are the unique guardians of the American values that our country holds dear. Those who gave up everything for freedom, anti-corruption principles, or a refusal to abet a repressive regime hold and transmit the core democratic principles our country needs to thrive. Through policy initiatives that have been weaponizing misery, we have been deterring and denying legitimate asylum claims. We continue to do so at the detriment of our own country's future. Details: Boston, MA: Boston College, 2018. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 5, 2018 at: https://law.lclark.edu/live/files/26747-lcb222article7hongpdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://law.lclark.edu/live/files/26747-lcb222article7hongpdf Shelf Number: 151547 Keywords: AsylumImmigration |