Recent Landmark Victories in the Struggle for U.S. Immigration Laws to Recognize and Fully Protect Human Rights Of Women:
To be eligible for political asylum in the United States an individual must establish that he or she is a refugee under the Immigration and Nationality Act. He or she must be outside his or her country of nationality, and be unable or unwilling to return to that country because of past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of one of five protected grounds: race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group. The applicant must prove that the feared persecution is either by the government or by groups or individuals the government is unable or unwilling to control.
Under Matter of L-R- (2010) and Matter of R-A- (2009), victims of domestic violence can establish eligibility for asylum as members of a “particular social group”
If you have been a victim of domestic violence in your home country and wish to apply for GENDER BASED asylum green card in the United States you might be eligible.
For more details and consultation on your situation please contact me for an appointment and a confidential consultation.
HUMA KAMGAR, ESQ.,
NEW YORK, NY 10007
WHAT IS GENDER BASED ASYLUM?
Since the mid-1990s, there has been increasing attention paid to the fact that many women around the globe experience gender-specific types of persecution, and that they could qualify for refugee protection under U.S. law. Gender-based persecution (MISTREATMENT) includes practices such as:
- Human Trafficking for Prostitution or
- Sexual Slavery
- Domestic Violence
- Female Genital Cutting (FGC)
- Forced Marriage
- “Honor” Killings
- Forced Abortion or Reproductive
- Rape and other Sexual Violence
As more gender-based asylum claims are raised in the U.S., immigration judges and the courts have been forced to confront a range of issues related to persecution that is unique to women and girls, as well as other groups such as gays and lesbians, children, and the disabled. Women fleeing gender persecution often arrive in the U.S. only to be told that they do not qualify for asylum, and that they will be forcibly returned to the very countries from which they have fled for their lives.
BASED ON A RESEARCH CONDUCTED AND COMPLILED BY CENTER FOR GENDER AND REFUGEE STUDIES (CGRS):
At least one out of every three women around the world has been beaten, coerced into sex, or otherwise abused in her lifetime—usually by someone known to her. Each year, an estimated 700,000 to two million women and girls are trafficked internationally—many for sexual exploitation. Women account for nearly half the 40 million people living with HIV/AIDS worldwide; in sub-Saharan Africa 57% of adults with HIV/AIDS are women. It is estimated that about 130 million women worldwide have undergone female genital cutting (FGC), with an additional two million girls and women undergoing the procedure every year. Out of 550 million working poor in the world, an estimated 330 million are women. Two-thirds of the world’s 875 million illiterate adults are women, and half of the children in the world who are not in school are girls.
Under international and United States law, a refugee is defined as a person with a “well-founded fear of persecution” for reasons of race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group. Based on this language, the refugee definition is commonly understood to include three essential elements:
(1) there must be a form of harm rising to the level of persecution, inflicted by a government or by individuals or a group that the government cannot or will not control;
(2) the person’s fear of such harm must be well-founded — the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that a fear can be well-founded if there is a one-in-ten likelihood of its occurring;
(3) the harm, or persecution, must be inflicted upon the person for reasons related to the person’s race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a particular social group (the nexus).
The international definition of “refugee” has been interpreted primarily in the context of male asylum-seekers, to the prejudice of women refugees. A classic image of a refugee is that of the male political dissident, e.g., Andrei Sakharov of the former Soviet Union, who was persecuted for denouncing totalitarianism. In such a case an adjudicator has little difficulty recognizing that the harm suffered amounts to persecution and that it was related to one of the five grounds.
The claims of women asylum-seekers often differ from those of men in several respects. First, women often suffer harms which are either unique to their gender, such as female genital mutilation or forcible abortion, or which are more commonly inflicted upon women than men, such as rape or domestic violence. Second, women’s claims differ from those of men in that they may suffer harms solely or exclusively because they are women, i.e., as a result of their gender (such as the policies of the Taliban in Afghanistan). And third, women often suffer harm at the hands of private individuals (such as family members who threaten them with “honor killings” or abusive spouses who batter them), rather than governmental actors.
The distinctions between the more traditional claims of male asylum seekers, and those of women, have often adversely impacted women asylum-seekers. Decision-makers often fail to recognize that harms unique to women — such as forced marriage or honor killings — may constitute persecution. They are also resistant to the developing jurisprudence which recognizes that harms inflicted primarily because of gender may come within the protection of international or domestic refugee law, and that persecution at the hands of private actors can form the basis of refugee protection where there is a failure of state protection.
These developing international human rights and refugee norms provide a basis for extending protection to women asylum-seekers regardless of the distinctions between their claims and the more traditional claims of male applicants. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has provided guidance in cases of women asylum-seekers and immigration authorities in Canada, the United States and Australia have all issued guidelines for adjudicators .
Notwithstanding these developments, the claims of women asylum-seekers continue to meet denials due to erroneous interpretations of the refugee definition by decision-makers, as well as a fundamental lack of understanding of the applicable human rights norms and the relevant country conditions.
The United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees (UNHCR) and other U.N. bodies have recognized and attempted to address the intersection of gender-based violence and forced displacement since the 1980s.The UNHCR Executive Committee (EXCOM) first issued formal recommendations regarding expansion of the refugee definition to include individuals who have experienced sexual violence or other gender-related forms of persecution in 1991: Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Guidelines on the Protection of Refugee Women, U.N. Doc. ES/SCP/67 (1991). The agency issued more comprehensive guidelines in 2002: UNHCR, Guidelines on International Protection: Gender-related persecution within the context of Article 1A(2) of the 1951 Convention and/or 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees, UN Doc. HCR/GIP/02/01, 7 May 2002. The UNHCR Executive Committee has also exhorted states to develop and implement domestic criteria and guidelines regarding protection for women who claim refugee status based on a well-founded fear of gender-related persecution. Several receiving states have since either enacted such guidelines or have amended refugee and asylum legislation to instruct adjudicators to recognize gender-based persecution as a potential ground for refugee protection.
IF YOU ARE A WOMAN AND YOU THINK YOU SUFFERED MISTREATMENT OR SUBJECTED TO INHUMAN TREATMENT OR OPPRESSED IN YOUR HOME COUNTRY AGAINST YOUR WISHES SIMPLY BECAUSE OF BEING A FEMALE YOU MIGHT WANT TO EXPLORE THE POSSIBILITY OF APPLYING FOR ASYLUM IN THE UNITED STATES. IF GRANTED ASYLUM IN THE UNITED STATES THEN YOU WILL BE ABLE LIVE AND WORK OR STUDY LEGALLY IN THE UNITED STATES AND ALSO APPLY FOR A GREEN CARD AFTER ONE YEAR.
FOR MORE INFORMATION AND CONFIDENTIAL CONSULTATION CONTACT IMMIGRATION ATTORNEY :
HUMA KAMGAR, ESQ.,
305 BROADWAY 14TH FLOOR
NEW YORK, NY 10007
CALL TODAY FOR AN APPOINTMENT AND CONSULTATION
Huma Kamgar: Motion to reconsider granted by the Board of Immigration appeals(BIA) Frivolous finding vacated.
WAS YOUR ASYLUM CASE DENIED BY THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE AND YOU WERE FOUND “FRIVOLOUS”???: NYC IMMIGRATION ATTORNEY GETS “FRIVOLOUS FINDING” …: HUMA HANRATTY KAMGAR, New York Immigration Attorney, won motion to reconsider on appeal with the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA)
HUMA HANRATTY KAMGAR, New York Immigration Attorney, won motion to reconsider on appeal with the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) having reversed and vacated Immigration Judge (IJ) finding that the asylum applicant had filed a “frivolous” application nine years ago.
For all asylum applications filed on or after April 1, 1997, an application is subject to the provisions of section 208(d)(6) of the Act only if a final order by an immigration judge or the Board of Immigration Appeals specifically finds that the alien knowingly filed a frivolous asylum application.
The Immigration forms and Immigration courts routinely provide asylum applicants with Warning Against Filing a Frivolous Asylum
If you file a frivolous asylum application, you will be PERMANENTLY BARRED from seeking any form of discretionary relief in the United States, including adjustment of status, cancellation of removal, or voluntary departure.
For immigration purposes, an asylum application is frivolous if any of its material elements is deliberately fabricated.
Remember, the credibility of your claim is at issue in an asylum case. What you write in your application, and what you say under oath in an asylum interview or in an immigration court, will decide whether you are a credible person and have a credible claim.
If the immigration judge finds that you have filed a fraudulent asylum application, not only will you have a deportation order that will be difficult to reverse on appeal, but you will never be able to apply for any other form of discretionary relief!
So, if you knowingly submit a fraudulent asylum application, you are subject to the harsh penalty of permanently becoming ineligible for other relief, regardless of sympathetic circumstances.
A frivolous finding is basically a “death sentence” for immigration purposes, so you should never file a frivolous application.
However, if for some reason an Immigration Judge finds that an asylum applicant has filed a “frivolous asylum application” you can challenge that finding later on.
In 2003, an asylum applicant was denied asylum and all other relief and was also slammed by the Immigration judge with a “frivolous finding”. The immigration judge’s finding that the asylum applicant had filed a frivolous asylum application banned the applicant FOREVER from receiving any immigration benefit under the Immigration & Nationality Act. The applicant was ordered deported.
Years later, in 2010 while still in the United states, the applicant met, fell in love and married a U.S. citizen. When the U.S. citizen wife petitioned for the applicant as her husband to get the green card or adjustment of status it was denies by the Department of Homeland security (DHS). The reason for the denial of adjustment of status petition was the “frivolous finding” of 2003.
In 2011, the applicant and his wife consulted and retained NYC Immigration attorney Huma Hanratty Kamgar. By a motion to reconsider on appeal, attorney Huma Hanratty Kamgar was able to get the “frivolous finding” reversed and vacated by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). Despite strong opposition by the DHS, immigration attorney Huma Hanratty Kamgar, successfully persuaded the BIA to reverse and vacate the “frivolous finding”. The BIA stated in pertinent part that “we agree that sua sponte reconsideration of that aspect of our prior order is warranted” “we will sua sponte reconsider and vacate that aspect of our …order affirming the immigration judge’s frivolous finding.”
Because of successful and sound legal arguments made by immigration attorney Huma Hanratty Kamgar and the resulting victory enabled the applicant to file for a green card based on marriage to a U.S. citizen and he will be able to adjust status without leaving the United States.
Also Check out A successful motion to Reopen made by Huma Kamgar wherein the asylum applicant was denied without a hearing more then ten years ago and violated voluntary departure order…Upon a motion to eopen based on complexed legal basis the case was reopened by the immigration judge for a new hearing and a new asylum claim!!!!!!
Click on the following link:
If you or any one you know is facing similar predicament please do not delay in despair. Help may be just a phone call away.
NYC IMMIGRATION ATTORNEY HUMA HANRATTY KAMGAR at
Law Office of Huma H. Kamgar, Esq.,
305 Broadway 14th Fl
New York, NY 10007
ASYLUM IN THE USA: HOW YOU MAY BE ELIGIBLE TO QUALIFY? BASIC REQUIREMENTS. HUMA KAMGAR, Attorney At law
ASYLUM LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES ARE AIMED TOWARDS PROVIDING PROTECTION AND SAFE PLACE TO LIVE FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO MEET ONE OF THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS:
1. YOU HAVE SUFFERED HARM OR PERSECUTION IN THE PAST IN YOUR HOME COUNTRY OF NATIONALITY BECAUSE OF your race, or your religion, or your political opinion or your nationality or ethnicity or your membership in a particular social group. The past persecution, mistreatment or harm must be connected to at least one of these reasons. For example you suffered harm in the past in your home country because you belong to a ethnic or religious group which is considered a deprived or oppressed minority. Another example would be if you participated in certain political activities and the government of your country suppresses those activities or political party. Yet another example would be your membership in a particular social group. This category is a tricky one and the United States laws on this are still evolving and most cases are decided on case by case based on specific legal arguments around that issue. However, more and more case law is developing around this category and it is more recognized then before.
2. YOU DID NOT SUFFER OR FACE ANY PAST PERSECUTION OR HARM IN YOUR NATIVE COUNTRY OF NATIONALITY BASED ON ANY OF THE ABOVE CRITERIA BUT YOU CAN DEMONSTRATE OR PROVE THAT YOU HAVE A WELL-FOUNDED FEAR OF FURURE HARM OR PERSECUTION UPON GOING BACK TO YOUR COUNTRY OF NATIONALITY DUE TO your race or religion or nationality or political opinion or your membrship in a particular social group. Although you need only prove the connection of future fear of harm with ONE of the reasons stated here it could be more then one reason. Most of the time the reasons might overlap. For example you might have a specific relifion which supports a particular political view as well. Or for instance your ethnic backgroung may be one that follows a specific religion in that country which makes you a minority there and you are oppressed due to those reasons.
As for membership in a particular social group you simply need to show that you are a member of such class of people who have suffered or are suffering harm in that country of your origin for example women in certain country are subjected to certain practices which men are not. This will include forced abortion as in China, because only women can have abortion and men dont, denying right to education to girls in some countries such as Indo-Pak and Afghanistan and Iran etc, forced marriages only upon girls or women such as mostly in the Middle east, acid attacks on women of certian socio-economic class in some countries such as Pakistan or India, honor killing for wanting to enter a love marriage etc. Please refer to my blog and posts on gender based asylum for a further understanding of this category of asylum.
You need not show that you suffered any special harm in the past, so long as you can demonstrate that other “similarly situated” women and girls or individuals are suffering the specific harm and persecution back in your country then if you are determined to be a member of that class of women you will qualify for asylum under the ‘particular social group” category. This category also helps gay and lesbians and Eunich (heejra) and other socially discriminated minority groups of specific socio-economic classes.
Asylum Laws of the united states are liberal but comlexed. To fit into any of these categories is not simple. You need advise and legal analysis of an experienced Immigration attorney who can guide you through the process in meeting the legal requirement for asylum in the United States.
Once granted asylum, you can then apply for a green card after one year and also sponsor your dependent children and spouse within one year.
the after five years you can apply to become a United States citizen.
If you need any further legal advice or you believe that you may have a asylum case or basis for it but you are not sure please contact EXPERIENCED IMMIGRATION ATTORNEY
HUMA KAMGAR Attorney at law
NEW YORK, NY 10007
In 2001, a Chinese woman from Fujian province of China was denied any and all relief by the Immigration court in New York. she was not considered for her asylum application. Eleven years later she found NYC Immigration attorney Huma H. Kamgar, at 305 Broadway 14th floor, New York, NY 10007. After discussing her immigration case with her, Huma Kamgar prepared and filed a Motion to reopen the case with the Immigration Court. Based on the in depth research and persuasive legal argument presented in the motion combined with strong supporting documentation, the motion to reopen was granted by the Immigration court after eleven years of the denial and closure.
If your asylum/ immigration case had been denied or closed many years ago and you have been told that now you have no remedy any more, please do not give up…. contact Immigration Attorney NYC :
Huma H. Kamgar