Till Death–or the Attorney General–Do Us Part: How the Extension of Asylum Eligibility to Spouses of Victims of China's "One Couple, One Child" Policy Still Comports with Domestic Immigration Jurisprudence

Andrea R. Pestone, Washington College of Law, American University

Abstract

Till Death–or the Attorney General–Do Us Part: How the Extension of Asylum Eligibility to Spouses of Victims of China's "One Couple, One Child" Policy Still Comports with Domestic Immigration Jurisprudence. It is a discussion of the One Child Policy in China, the domestic immigration law that attempts to respond to victims persecuted by the Policy, and the recent Attorney General decision Matter of J-S-, which seemingly precludes asylum eligibility to spouses of individuals who have suffered forcible abortions or sterilizations. This Comment analyzes the previous conflicting precedent, In re C-Y-Z- and Shi Liang Lin v. U.S. Department of Justice, statutory interpretation of 8 U.S.C § 1101 (a)(42), Chevron deference to In Re C-Y-Z-, comparison of this issue to other immigration case law, and the subsequent Attorney General decision attempting to resolve the circuit split–to conclude that spouses should be granted asylum eligibility. This Comment also proposes three possible methods of circumventing the Matter of J-S- ruling and a three-part test, that courts should utilize in the interim, to determine spousal eligibility.