國立虎尾科技大學 |

How Do the Courts See Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in the U.S. Asylum Context : = Issues of Judicial Ethics in the Fact-Finding and Decision-Making Process.

Record Type:	Language materials, manuscript : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	How Do the Courts See Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in the U.S. Asylum Context :/
Reminder of title:	Issues of Judicial Ethics in the Fact-Finding and Decision-Making Process.
Author:	Erfe, Francine.
Description:	1 online resource (64 pages)
Notes:	Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 84-11.
Contained By:	Masters Abstracts International84-11.
Subject:	Law. -
Online resource:	click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798379509309

How Do the Courts See Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in the U.S. Asylum Context : = Issues of Judicial Ethics in the Fact-Finding and Decision-Making Process.
Erfe, Francine.

How Do the Courts See Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in the U.S. Asylum Context :Issues of Judicial Ethics in the Fact-Finding and Decision-Making Process. - 1 online resource (64 pages)

Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 84-11.

Thesis (M.P.H.)--Yale University, 2023.

Includes bibliographical references

Background: There are many concerns regarding the U.S. asylum system, especially regarding how it views cases based on claims of sexual and gender-based violence. Wide discrepancies in decision-making in the various courts throughout the U.S. not solely attributed to the strength of the asylum case or the evidence presented leads to injustice for people seeking asylum.Methods: Precedential cases were selected and read in their entirety, grouped together by topic or executive branch era in which it occurred, and the types of evidence extracted and tallied. Categories for evidence were expert testimony, DOS reports, US agency reports, UN agency reports, and scholarly works. In each group of cases, I analyzed: (1) The state of precedent and decisions of each case, and the disparities in outcomes within each group of cases (2) Potential contributing factors to the disparities in outcomes (primarily the type and usage of evidence, gender of the judge, experience in immigration work) (3) The relationship of these factors to the ethical principles governing judicial practice as they relate to bias and competenceLaw/case review - discussion and analysis: The three case categories were: (1) Decisions regarding female genital mutilation (2) Decisions regarding domestic violence-based asylum claims, and (3) Domestic violence asylum claims under the shifting policies of the Trump and Biden administrations. In terms of gender bias, it was found that for all three case categories, a majority of the decisions were written by male judges. Bias based on political affiliation was considered primarily for the third case group, as it was found that shifting executive administrations likely influenced the decision-making. Competence had the most significant connection to the evidence presented in these claims. Based on a decision-maker's previous experience and the types of evidence analyzed and incorporated into the decision, a relationship was found between these factors to the ethical principles governing judicial practice as they relate to bias and competence.Conclusion: To hold the U.S. asylum system and system of judicial reasoning accountable to ethics and to the promises of the international human rights law the U.S. has undertaken, it needs to be aligned with contemporary, evidence-based understandings of what bias and competence are. Whatever bias judges have that come with gender, political affiliation, or any other biases, and any lack of competence that is seen through incorporations or lack thereof of evidence, it is best overcome not by restricting the gender of decision-makers, but rather training them to overcome bias and increase competence.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2024

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798379509309Subjects--Topical Terms:

671705
Law.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Refugees and asylumIndex Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

How Do the Courts See Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in the U.S. Asylum Context : = Issues of Judicial Ethics in the Fact-Finding and Decision-Making Process.
LDR:04155ntm a22003977 4500 001 1143307
005 20240517100400.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 250605s2023 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798379509309
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI30485471
035 $a AAI30485471
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Erfe, Francine. $3 1467948
245 1 0 $a How Do the Courts See Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in the U.S. Asylum Context : $b Issues of Judicial Ethics in the Fact-Finding and Decision-Making Process.
264 0 $c 2023
300 $a 1 online resource (64 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 84-11.
500 $a Advisor: Miller, Alice;Bothwell, Laura.
502 $a Thesis (M.P.H.)--Yale University, 2023.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a Background: There are many concerns regarding the U.S. asylum system, especially regarding how it views cases based on claims of sexual and gender-based violence. Wide discrepancies in decision-making in the various courts throughout the U.S. not solely attributed to the strength of the asylum case or the evidence presented leads to injustice for people seeking asylum.Methods: Precedential cases were selected and read in their entirety, grouped together by topic or executive branch era in which it occurred, and the types of evidence extracted and tallied. Categories for evidence were expert testimony, DOS reports, US agency reports, UN agency reports, and scholarly works. In each group of cases, I analyzed: (1) The state of precedent and decisions of each case, and the disparities in outcomes within each group of cases (2) Potential contributing factors to the disparities in outcomes (primarily the type and usage of evidence, gender of the judge, experience in immigration work) (3) The relationship of these factors to the ethical principles governing judicial practice as they relate to bias and competenceLaw/case review - discussion and analysis: The three case categories were: (1) Decisions regarding female genital mutilation (2) Decisions regarding domestic violence-based asylum claims, and (3) Domestic violence asylum claims under the shifting policies of the Trump and Biden administrations. In terms of gender bias, it was found that for all three case categories, a majority of the decisions were written by male judges. Bias based on political affiliation was considered primarily for the third case group, as it was found that shifting executive administrations likely influenced the decision-making. Competence had the most significant connection to the evidence presented in these claims. Based on a decision-maker's previous experience and the types of evidence analyzed and incorporated into the decision, a relationship was found between these factors to the ethical principles governing judicial practice as they relate to bias and competence.Conclusion: To hold the U.S. asylum system and system of judicial reasoning accountable to ethics and to the promises of the international human rights law the U.S. has undertaken, it needs to be aligned with contemporary, evidence-based understandings of what bias and competence are. Whatever bias judges have that come with gender, political affiliation, or any other biases, and any lack of competence that is seen through incorporations or lack thereof of evidence, it is best overcome not by restricting the gender of decision-makers, but rather training them to overcome bias and increase competence.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2024
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Law. $3 671705
650 4 $a Ethics. $3 555769
650 4 $a Public health. $3 560998
653 $a Refugees and asylum
653 $a Sexual and gender-based violence
653 $a Social and behavioral sciences
653 $a United States
653 $a Decision-making
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0398
690 $a 0394
690 $a 0573
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a Yale University. $b Social and Behavioral Sciences. $3 1467949
773 0 $t Masters Abstracts International $g 84-11.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=30485471 $z click for full text (PQDT)