Abstract
Part I of this article examines two cases. In one case, a United States immigration court allowed female circumcision as a defense to deportation. In another case, the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board granted political asylum after recognizing female circumcision as a form of persecution. Part II assesses the extent of protections currently provided for potential victims of female circumcision under U.S. asylum law and analyzes the factors that a court should consider when making asylum determinations. Part III recommends that gender should be added to the enumerated grounds for persecution under U.S. asylum law. This section provides a hypothetical that demonstrates how claims of asylum based on female circumcision should be analyzed as gender-based persecution.
Recommended Citation
Gregory A. Kelson,
Granting Political Asylum to Potential Victims of Female Circumcision,
3
Mich. J. Gender & L.
257
(1995).
Available at:
https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjgl/vol3/iss1/7