Abstract
In the wake of World War II, the United States Supreme Court created a “persecutor bar” for asylum law that denied asylum status from being granted to individuals who had “voluntarily participated” in persecution. Unfortunately, while there have been changes in the asylum law, and the world, the persecutor bar has not changed. In Negusie v. Gonzales, the Fifth Circuit refused to move away from the old persecutor bar, ultimately creating an unjust and erroneous result. The old persecutor bar is no longer appropriate for Negusie, or for any other asylum case. This Note examines why Negusie demands a new test for the persecutor bar (one based on the totality of circumstances) to ensure that the persecutor bar has the flexibility to protect victims of persecution while barring asylum to those who participated in persecution.
Recommended Citation
Mark L. Philipp,
Assisting in Persecution: Analyzing the Decision in Negusie v. Gonzales, 231 F. App’x 325 (5th Cir. 2007),
34
S. Ill. U. L.J.
417
(2010).
Available at:
https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/siulj/vol34/iss2/8