Posted by Eugene Volokh:
Some Thoughts on How Asylum Claims Based on Fear of Religious Persecution Are
Treated,
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_08_09-2009_08_15.shtml#1249945182
from someone who has some experience with immigration law:
I want to assure you that immigration judges are well aware of the
potential for abusing asylum by making sham conversions. However,
it is not the IJ's job to marshal evidence of a true religious
conviction. As in the Article III courts, the IJs are there to
provide a neutral venue for determining an alien's removability and
any possible relief from removability under immigration laws.
The IJs have a bit more leeway than Article III judges when it
comes to addressing respondents and witnesses, but it is ultimately
the respondent's to demonstrate religious conviction--the burden is
on the alien to establish eligibility for relief. Then, the DHS
trial attorney [TA] may present evidence--including by
cross-examining the respondent--demonstrating that the respondent
does not sincerely hold the claimed religious beliefs.
Some standard questions asked by TAs to establish Christian
bonafides:
Who is Jesus Christ?
What is your favorite story from the Bible?
What is your favorite prayer? Can you recite that prayer or a part
of that prayer?
These seem like rather basic questions, but it is astounding how
often Christian claimants cannot answer them. It is also fairly
easy to spot the respondents who have been coached since they know
one and only one story from the Bible, which is inevitably
short-handed as: "water to wine." This is a reference to Jesus'
first public miracle at a wedding in Cana and is considered an
anti-Shibboleth by TAs and many IJs. Most frequently, Chinese
applicants can name only this Bible story, as a result of being
coached by the smugglers they use to enter the United States.
Similarly, applicants who have been coached will say "the Lord's
Prayer" is their favorite, and then recite some variation of the
traditional Catholic grace before a meal (i.e. not the Lord's
Prayer). The smugglers abroad and "immigration consultants" here in
the United States are not very imaginative and have no real
interest in their victims, so these responses do not change that
often.
If the respondent satisfactorily answers these questions, the TA
may then escalate to more complex questions of Christian theology.
That is a matter of individual discretion, however. Often, you can
get a pretty good idea as to the sincerity of the respondent's
religious conviction with just those few questions. (Additionally,
the TAs deal with many religions on a regular basis, not just
Christianity. I suspect--without knowing, mind you--that they have
a list of questions and answers prepared for the most common
religions. They also prepare in advance of proceedings for this
type of inquiry.)
You are right to point out that a person can know the theology of a
religion, its practice, and its procedure without genuinely having
religious conviction. As with many areas of law, we cannot actually
know a person's state of mind, thoughts, and beliefs. However, a
person's knowledge and behavior can be a good indication of same.
Typically, an applicant for asylum making a religious claim will
provide three types of evidence of belief: his testimony, the
testimony of others who worship with him or see him at worship or
know of his long-standing belief, and documentary evidence like
baptismal certificates, photographs from religious ceremonies, etc.
All three types are open to inspection and attack by the TA.
_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.powerblogs.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh
