Yale Law Library - Reference Blog : Case Law

Yale Law School Supreme Court Clinic will be heard on asylum case

ct286 — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 15:23:00 GMT

On March 17, 2008, the Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether a person who was compelled, against his will, to assist or take part in persecution is barred from asylum under the "persecutor bar" at Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) § 208(b)(2)(A)(i). Section 208 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1158 provides that the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General may, in his discretion, grant asylum to an alien who demonstrates that he is a refugee within the meaning of the Act. The statutory definition of "refugee" excludes "any person who ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in the persecution of any person on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion." 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(B). If the evidence indicates that an asylum applicant persecuted any person, he bears the burden of proving that he did not.

Mr. Negusie, caught up in the civil war between Eritrea and Ethiopia, was drafted and forced to be a guard in an Eritrean prison, where he was ordered to mistreat prisoners. He eventually escaped, hiding in a shipping container on a ship bound for the United States. Despite a finding that he was likely to be tortured if returned to Eritrea, he was denied asylum because of his activities in the prison.

In rejecting Negusie's immigration appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, in an unpublished decision, determined that Negusie's intent while being compelled to assist authorities was irrelevant. Rather, the Court's focus was "on whether particular conduct can be considered assisting in the persecution of civilians." Fedorenko v. U.S., 449 U.S. 490, 512 n. 34 (1981). The case opinion is Negusie v. Gonzales, 231 Fed. Appx. 325, No. 06-60193 (5th Cir. May 15, 2007) (per curiam), available at: http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions%5Cunpub%5C06/06-60193.0.wpd.pdf

The Yale Law School Supreme Court Clinic was retained to prepare a petition for certiorari and argued that the statutory history and plain language of the INA's persecutor exception demonstrate the Congress never intended it to apply to asylum-seekers who have been compelled under threat of torture and death to participate in persecution. See: http://www.yale.edu/supremecourtclinic/pages/cases.html

The DOJ's response is on file at: http://www.usdoj.gov/osg/briefs/2007/0responses/2007-0499.resp.html

The case will be argued during the October 2008 term.

So, which State Supreme Court is the most convincing?

Tom Boone — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:56:00 GMT

A recent study of citations to state supreme court opinions reveals that the California Supreme Court is most often followed by sister state supreme court. The New York Times article describing the study includes the following:

In the 65 years ending in 2005, more than 24,000 state high court cases have been followed at least once. California leads with 1,260 decisions. Washington is next, with 942, and Colorado is third, with 848. New York comes in 10th and is only about half as influential as California, with 627 followed cases.

The study, published in the UC Davis Law Review is available here.

Open Access to Research

Tom Boone — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 19:01:00 GMT

It is an exciting time for researchers who are rich with intellectual curiosity, but short on cash.

The FY2008 omnibus appropriations bill contained a provision to establish a new policy directing the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to provide the public with free online access to findings from its funded research. Beginning on April 7, 2008, every scientist who publishes the results of research funded by an NIH grant in a peer-reviewed journal is required to deposit a digital copy of the article in PubMed Central the online digital library maintained by the NIH. The public will be able to access these articles through PubMed Central for free!

Open access to the law has also been in the spotlight recently. Earlier this month, Creative Commons and Public.Resource.Org announced the first release of a case law available for download by developers. The release covers all U.S. Supreme Court decisions and all Court of Appeals decisions from 1950 forward. The case law was provided by Fastcase, Inc. which recently announced its new Public Library of Law.

In addition to this exciting news, PACER is now available at no-fee at sixteen libraries, thanks to a joint pilot project by the Government Printing Office and the Administrative Office of the United States Courts.

Finally, Harvard University's Faculty of Arts and Sciences recently approved a plan to give the University a worldwide license to make each faculty member's scholarly articles available in a free repository and to exercise the copyright in the articles, provided that the articles are not sold for a profit.

Free case law database announced

Tom Boone — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 15:39:00 GMT

Public.Resource.org and FastCase recently announced plans to create a free database of federal caselaw accessible to anyone via the internet. The database will include all U.S. Supreme Court cases since 1754 and all U.S. Court of Appeals cases since 1950, and new cases will be added as they are published.

No word yet when the database will be released, but snapshots of the archive will be made available in early 2008.

[Press Release] 1.8 million pages of federal case law to become freely available