Which Women's Rights? A Comparative Analysis of Gender-Based Asylum Claims in US Federal Court
Date
2019
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Producer
Director
Performer
Choreographer
Costume Designer
Music
Videographer
Lighting Designer
Set Designer
Crew Member
Funder
Rehearsal Director
Concert Coordinator
Advisor
Moderator
Panelist
Alternative Title
Department
Haverford College. Department of Political Science
Type
Thesis
Original Format
Running Time
File Format
Place of Publication
Date Span
Copyright Date
Award
Language
eng
Note
Table of Contents
Terms of Use
Rights Holder
Access Restrictions
Open Access
Terms of Use
Tripod URL
Identifier
Abstract
In recent American political discourse, the rising number of asylum seekers has been a popular subject, characterized as a national security threat by the right and a humanitarian crisis by the left. 2017 saw a 21 percent increase in affirmative asylum applications from the year prior, with application numbers reaching their highest level since 1995. Among the thousands of individuals fleeing persecution in their home countries are those seeking protection from gender-based violence. By examining the adjudication of female genital cutting (FGC) and domestic violence (DV)-based asylum claims, this thesis identifies certain trends in how courts understand gender-based violence. The exotification and othering of Africa in FGC cases and the reification of a public/private divide in DV cases expose how the United States remains reluctant to accept asylum claims based on forms of gender-based violence which are common within its borders.