Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMolina, Isela
dc.date.accessioned2007-04-13T21:25:52Z
dc.date.available2007-04-13T21:25:52Z
dc.date.issued1999
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1928/2919
dc.description44 p. ; An outstanding student paper selected as a Honors Paper.en
dc.description.abstractThis article will explore the extent of which Chinese citizens fleeing PRC's "one couple - one child" policy are eligible for asylum under U.S. refugee law. Section II of this article provides an historical analysis of PRC's population control policy. This section addresses the reasoning behind the policy. It also discusses the enforcement mechanisms PRC has implemented to enforce this policy. It focuses on the types of punishment imposed on those who violate the policy. It also discusses what protections, if any, PRC offers to those who object to the policy. Section III analyzes PRC's "one couple - one child" policy with respect to U.S. asylum law. It explores the issue of whether implementation of PRC's "one couple – one child" policy amounts to persecution. It then analyzes the question of whether a person's opposition to this governmental policy amounts to an expression of a political opinion for purposes of qualifying as a refugee. This section also discusses whether claims based on this type of persecution meet the nexus requirement of U.S. refugee law. After analyzing relevant case law, it concludes that certain Chinese aliens fleeing PRC's population control policy, to the extent that they have a well-founded fear of persecution on account of political opinion, should be eligible for asylum. In 1996 §601(a) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act amended the refugee definition of §101(a)(42) of the Refugee Act to include involuntary sterilization or abortion as a form of persecution. Section IV of this article analyzes the regulatory and legislative history of this amendment. It also discusses the effects this amendment has had on refugee policy and analyzes what new issues now arise as a result of the change in the definition of refugee. Section V concludes with a discussion of international human rights law with respect to the right to found a family. It analyzes whether current U.S. refugee law in regard to PRC's population control policy is consistent with the humanitarian concerns and purposes of the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipUniversity of New Mexico School of Lawen
dc.format.extent1756712 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.subjectChinaen_US
dc.subjectPopulation Control Policyen_US
dc.subjectRefugeesen_US
dc.subjectPolitical Asylumen_US
dc.subjectUnited Statesen_US
dc.subjectRefugee Lawen_US
dc.subjectAsylum Lawen_US
dc.subjectFederal Case Lawen_US
dc.subjectIllegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Acten_US
dc.subjectProtocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (1967)en_US
dc.subjectInternational Human Rights Lawen_US
dc.subjectNexus Requirementen_US
dc.titleThe Grant of Political Asylum Based on China's Population Control Policyen_US
dc.typeOtheren_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record