Abstract
This Comment argues that the standards enunciated by the Supreme Court in Elias-Zacarias should not be applied beyond cases involving persecution on account of political opinion. Part I sets out the relevant statutes, treaties, and international documents that control U.S. asylum law. Part II describes the majority and dissenting opinions in Elias-Zacarias. Part III analyzes the Supreme Court's decision in Elias-Zacarias and argues that the decision was misguided in its approach. This Comment concludes that Elias-Zacarias should be limited in its future application so that the United States can maintain its compliance with international treaty obligations.
Recommended Citation
Bret I. Parker,
Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Elias-Zacarias: A Departure from the Past,
15 Fordham Int'l L.J. 1275
(1991).
Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ilj/vol15/iss4/10