Book contents
- Feminist Judgments: Family Law Opinions Rewritten
- Feminist Judgments Series Editors
- Advisory Panel for Feminist Judgments Series
- Feminist Judgments: Family Law Opinions Rewritten
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Advisory Panel for Feminist Judgments: Family Law Opinions Rewritten
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Commentary on Reynolds v. United States
- 3 Commentary on McGuire v. McGuire
- 4 Commentary on Dandridge v. Williams
- 5 Commentary on Wisconsin v. Yoder
- 6 Commentary on Marvin v. Marvin
- 7 Commentary on Kulko v. Superior Court of California
- 8 Commentary on Daly v. Daly
- 9 Commentary on Michael H. v. Gerald D.
- 10 Commentary on DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services
- 11 Commentary on Simeone v. Simeone
- 12 Commentary on Borelli v. Brusseau
- 13 Commentary on Turner v. Rogers
- 14 Commentary on In the Matter of the Parentage of a Child by T.J.S. and A.L.S.
- 15 Commentary on Matter of A-B-
- 16 Commentary on Sessions v. Morales-Santana
- Index
15 - Commentary on Matter of A-B-
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 July 2020
- Feminist Judgments: Family Law Opinions Rewritten
- Feminist Judgments Series Editors
- Advisory Panel for Feminist Judgments Series
- Feminist Judgments: Family Law Opinions Rewritten
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Advisory Panel for Feminist Judgments: Family Law Opinions Rewritten
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Commentary on Reynolds v. United States
- 3 Commentary on McGuire v. McGuire
- 4 Commentary on Dandridge v. Williams
- 5 Commentary on Wisconsin v. Yoder
- 6 Commentary on Marvin v. Marvin
- 7 Commentary on Kulko v. Superior Court of California
- 8 Commentary on Daly v. Daly
- 9 Commentary on Michael H. v. Gerald D.
- 10 Commentary on DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services
- 11 Commentary on Simeone v. Simeone
- 12 Commentary on Borelli v. Brusseau
- 13 Commentary on Turner v. Rogers
- 14 Commentary on In the Matter of the Parentage of a Child by T.J.S. and A.L.S.
- 15 Commentary on Matter of A-B-
- 16 Commentary on Sessions v. Morales-Santana
- Index
Summary
For the nearly four decades since international refugee protections were codified in U.S. law, uncertainty has existed regarding whether survivors of intimate partner violence comprise a “particular social group” (“PSG”) that entitles them to asylum protection in the United States.1 Litigation in the first domestic-violence-based asylum case to reach the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”), Matter of R-A-,2 dragged on for fourteen years without resulting in precedent. Thereafter, in a move that would astonish strict adherents of civil procedure, advocates seeking asylum for clients who had endured intimate partner abuse would cite a brief authored by the Department of Homeland Security in another domestic violence asylum case, Matter of L-R-, in support of their arguments.3 Then, in 2014, the BIA issued a decision in Matter of A-R-C-G- that definitively established the right to asylum for survivors of intimate partner violence.4 The Board granted relief to Ms. C-G- based on her membership in the particular social group of “married women in Guatemala who are unable to leave their relationship.”
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Feminist Judgments: Family Law Opinions Rewritten , pp. 360 - 393Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020