Browse cases by category
- Attorneys & Legal Services
- Bankruptcy
- Civil Procedure & Administrative Law
- Civil Rights
- Consumer
- Criminal
- Disability
- Economic Development
- Education
- Elections
- Employment
- Environmental Justice
- Evidence
- Family Law
- Food Programs
- Government and Governmental Services
- Guardianship & Conservatorship
- Health
- Housing
- Immigration
- Juveniles
- License (Auto & Others)
- Mental Health
- Migrants
- Native Americans
- Other
- Prisons
- Public Utilities & Energy
- Rural Issues
- Senior Citizens
- Social Security & SSI
- Taxation
- Torts
- Unemployment Compensation & Unemployment Insurance
- Veterans & Military
- Welfare
- Wills & Estates
- Workforce Development
Peng-Fei Si v. Slattery
No. 94-2640 (2d Cir. filed Jan. 30, 1995) ; Clearinghouse Number: 50772
Description
Refugee from Forced Sterilization Asks Second Circuit to Find Him Eligible for Political Asylum and Withholding of Deportation
Abstract
The parties have filed their briefs with the Second Circuit in this
action challenging the decision of the Immigration and
Naturalization Service (INS) to deny appellant’s application
for political asylum and withholding of deportation. Appellant, a
Chinese national, fled his home country to avoid persecution and
forced sterilization pursuant to its “one family, one
child” policy. Ultimately, appellant came to the United
States aboard the Golden Venture, a boat that ran aground in New
York in 1993 with 327 refugees aboard. Appellant asserts that he
fears severe punishment upon his return to China because of the
extraordinary embarrassment that the Golden Venture incident has
brought the Chinese government and the individualized publicity
that his family has received in the United States. INS denied
appellant’s request for asylum and withholding of deportation
and ordered him excluded. Upon judicial review, the district court
remanded the case to INS for reconsideration in accordance with
instructions on parole and humanitarian stays of deportation issued
by INS on August 5, 1994. Both parties moved for clarification of
the court’s order. The district court denied
appellant’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus and enjoined
his expulsion on the condition that he apply for an expedited
appeal. On appeal, appellant argues that the district court erred
by failing to accord deference to a six-year-old policy of the
Attorney General that allows asylum and withholding eligibility
based on subjection to coercive family-planning practices.
Appellant also argues that the district court erred in failing to
recognize the passengers of the Golden Venture as a
“particular social group” eligible for asylum and
withholding because they (1) are closely affiliated people actuated
by a common impulse; (2) are linked by a fundamental characteristic
that distinguishes them in the eyes of the Chinese government and
the outside world; and (3) form part of a recognizable and discrete
group.
