Deciphering refugee status determination : a comparative analysis of religious and LGBTI+ asylum seekers

Abstract

Asylum seekers with similar stories of persecutions frequently receive contrary outcomes for their asylum application. This paradox leads one to wonder what the reasons behind asylum adjudication are and how Refugee Status Determination (RSD) processes are conducted. This study aims to investigate the impact of identity assessments on RSD outcomes. Existing literature suggests that asylum seekers not only need to prove a ‘well-founded fear’ of persecution, but also provide evidence to sustain that the identity they claim to hold is real. I employ three techniques of computerized text analysis on courts’ decisions and hearings applied over 130 cases of people requesting due to their sexual orientation, gender identity or religious affiliation in the 9th Judiciary Circuit of the United States. The evidence suggests the thoroughness with which applicants are assessed but no evidence was found to argue that identity-checks might be a relevant factor explaining asylum outcomes.