Truth and Trauma: Exploring the Merits of Non-adversarial Asylum Hearings

TRUTH AND TRAUMA: EXPLORING THE MERITS
OF NON-ADVERSARIAL ASYLUM HEARINGS
JOHANNA SELBERG*
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ......................................... 930
I. BACKGROUND: PATHWAYS TO ASYLUM AND THE ROLE OF TRAUMA . . . 930
A. The Current Asylum System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931
1. Aff‌irmative Asylum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931
2. Defensive Asylum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932
B. The Role of Trauma in Asylum Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933
II. SHORTCOMINGS OF THE CURRENT SYSTEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935
A. Inaccuracy ................................... 935
B. Lack of Fairness. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936
C. Discrepancies in Outcomes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937
D. Ineff‌iciency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938
III. BENEFITS OF A NON-ADVERSARIAL SYSTEM .................. 939
A. Truth-Finding ................................ 939
B. Fairness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 941
1. Opportunity to Be Heard and Equality of Arms. . . . . . 941
2. Fairness in Practice: VA Benef‌its Hearings......... 942
C. Intrinsic Value ................................ 944
IV. PROPOSALS FOR REFORM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 946
* Johanna Selberg, J.D. Candidate, 2021, Georgetown University Law Center. I would like to thank
Professors Smita Ghosh, Patrick Glen, and Jessica Wherry for their invaluable feedback and encourage-
ment during the drafting of this Note. Thank you also to Professor Jonah Perlin for teaching me how to
think and write like a lawyer. All errors are my own. © 2021, Johanna Selberg.
929
V. CONCLUSION ...................................... 947
INTRODUCTION
Immigration issues have received increasing public attention, most notably
in the context of border security and enforcement measures.
1
However, im-
migration enforcement is not the only site of injustice for immigrants and
asylum-seekers in particular. This Note examines the shortcomings of the
current asylum adjudication system—particularly as they relate to asylum
applicants who have suffered prior trauma—and argues for the adoption of a
non-adversarial format for asylum hearings. The Note argues that transition-
ing to inquisitorial asylum hearings would mark an important step towards
building a system that reliably leads to the fair, accurate, and eff‌icient adjudi-
cation of asylum claims. The Note concludes that in the absence of political
will to initiate fundamental change to the immigration system, smaller-scale
changes like the implementation of robust trauma-informed training for
Immigration Judges (IJs) and government attorneys can make a meaningful
difference for asylum-seekers.
The Note proceeds in f‌ive parts. Section I lays the necessary foundation for
the analysis by providing background on the aff‌irmative and defensive asy-
lum procedures and the prominent role of trauma in asylum cases. Section II
highlights the most troubling shortcomings of the current system, while
Section III explains how a non-adversarial format for asylum hearings would
work to create a system that is better suited to truth-f‌inding and fairness.
Section III also explores the inherent normative value of a non-adversarial
system. Section IV examines the most promising proposal for reform, and
Section V concludes with a brief summary.
I. BACKGROUND: PATHWAYS TO ASYLUM AND THE ROLE OF TRAUMA
To provide context for the potential benef‌its of adopting non-adversarial
asylum hearings, the Note will f‌irst lay out the two pathways towards asylum:
aff‌irmative asylum and defensive asylum. Next, the Note will elaborate on
trauma’s unique role in asylum cases and provide an overview of the current
system’s most serious f‌laws that create a pressing need for reform.
1. See, e.g., Hannah Rappleye & Lisa Riordan Seville, 24 Immigrants Have Died in ICE Custody During
the Trump Administration, NBC NEWS (June 9, 2019, 7:00 AM), https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/
immigration/24-immigrants-have-died-ice-custody-during-trump-administration-n1015291 (reporting on
immigrant deaths in ICE custody); Dara Lind, The Trump Administration’s Separation of Families at the
Border, Explained, VOX (Aug. 14, 2018, 1:29 PM), https://www.vox.com/2018/6/11/17443198/children-
immigrant-families-separated-parents (providing an overview of the Trump administration’s family
separation policy); Abigail Hauslohner, During First Two Years of ‘Muslim Ban,’ Trump Administration
Granted Few Waivers, WASH. POST (Sept. 24, 2019, 6:21 PM), https://www.washingtonpost.com/
immigration/during-f‌irst-two-years-of-muslim-ban-trump-administration-granted-few-waivers/2019/
09/24/44519d02-deec-11e9-8dc8-498eabc129a0_story.html (reporting on the travel restrictions often
referred to as “Muslim ban”).
930 GEORGETOWN IMMIGRATION LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 35:929

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT