Document Type

Article

Publication Date

Summer 2017

Abstract

This Article examines how federal circuit courts apply the substantial evidence test when reviewing asylum determinations made by immigration judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals. After outlining the statutory framework governing asylum under the Immigration and Nationality Act—including refugee status, nexus requirements, credibility determinations, and discretionary relief—the Article traces the historical development of the substantial evidence standard in immigration adjudication. Drawing on original empirical data from every circuit court of appeals, the Article categorizes circuits along a spectrum from “rigorous review” to “cursory check,” based on remand rates and depth of analytical engagement. The study evaluates how statutory changes, including the REAL ID Act’s credibility provisions, have influenced judicial deference and remand patterns. Ultimately, the Article argues that although the substantial evidence test is framed as deferential, its application varies significantly across circuits, producing meaningful differences in the review of asylum claims and in the protection afforded to applicants.

Share

COinS