Katie Cantone-Hardy
92 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 908
Asylum law in the United States faces near-constant critique. The “membership in a particular social group” eligibility category is one of its persistent thorns. Faced with a lack of legislative instruction on what “particular social group” (“PSG”) means, asylum adjudications of PSG claims have been chronically disjointed. Perhaps the only consensus regarding PSG is that its adoption into the asylum framework was intended to broaden asylum eligibility. However, the unique challenges posed by PSG have impeded this goal—even despite the creation of a separate “humanitarian asylum” inquiry designed to open other avenues for relief. To advance the inclusive goals both PSG and humanitarian asylum have failed to achieve, this Note advocates for amending the statutory refugee definition to replace PSG with more open-ended language drawn from the humanitarian asylum framework. The amendment and accompanying procedural guidance would allow applicants to successfully petition for asylum by proving past or prospective harm, regardless of nexus with a protected group, and eliminate the separate process for “humanitarian” claims.
