RECENT NEWS

HIRC Files Amicus Brief in Matter of Thomas

The Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinical Program has requested leave to file an amicus brief with the Board of Immigration Appeals in Matter of Thomas.  Previously before the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and the Supreme Court, Thomas is now on remand to the Board for a determination of whether family constitutes a particular social group.  In its supplemental brief, the Department of Homeland Security conceded that the Thomas family constituted a particular social group, but proposed a new and radical approach to evaluating the "nexus" element in asylum claims.  The Clinical Program responded to this novel analysis in its supplemental amicus brief.  It also urged the Board to clarify that the "social visibility" analysis it first mentioned in Matter of C-A-, 23 I&N Dec. 651 (BIA 2006), was not a requirement to be applied cumulatively with the long-standing social group analysis set forward by the Board in Matter of Acosta, 19 I&N Dec. 211 (BIA 1985).  The UNHCR has also filed a brief setting forward its position on the proper use of "social visibility/perception" in particular social group claims.

• Download Harvard Supplemental Amicus Brief Addressing Nexus

• Download UNHCR Amicus Brief

• Download Harvard Brief Addressing Family as a Particular Social Group

HIRC Moves Forward in International Litigation Challenging Canada's Return of Asylum Seekers to the United States

The Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinical Program, in conjunction with the HLS Human Rights Program and HLS Advocates for Human Rights, has successfully petitioned the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to hear the merits of its case against Canada's use of the "direct back" policy to return asylum seekers to the United States.  The Clinical Program's petition was found admissible by the Commission on November 1, 2006.  On January 1, 2007, the Clinical Program submitted its first observations on the merits of the case to the Commission.
[Click here to read the submission].  Amid reports that Canada is continuing the "direct back" policy despite pledges to the contrary, the Clinic is now preparing its reply to the observations submitted by Canada.

Under Canada's "direct back" policy, low-level immigration officials may decide to return asylum seekers arriving from the United States based on the level of traffic at a port of entry on any given day.  The directed-back asylum seekers are turned over to U.S. immigration authority without receiving any commitment that they will be allowed to return to Canada to pursue their asylum claims.  Unfortunately, some directed-back asylum seekers are detained by U.S. authorities and may be returned to countries where they face persecution under restrictive U.S. asylum policies out of line with international norms.  The Clinical Program is asking the Inter-American Commission to find that Canada's policy violates the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, and to recommend that Canada halt the practice.

ABOUT THE CLINIC

The Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinic is a collaborative project between Harvard Law School and Greater Boston Legal Services (GBLS) which is housed at GBLS. Deborah Anker is the Director of the Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinical Program and a Clinical Professor of Law.  She will be teaching courses in Refugee Law and Advocacy and Gender Asylum in the 2005-06 academic year. The Clinic is staffed by experienced attorneys of GBLS' Immigration Unit. GBLS has excellent facilities for clinical students that includes individual workspace, access to computers and case management systems and the full array of GBLS support services.

The Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinic involves students in the direct representation of victims of human rights abuses in applying for US refugee and related protections; some cases also involve family reunification and avoidance of forced removal in immigration proceedings. Students have the experience of fully developing a case through fact gathering, to development of legal theory, to final presentation. They engage in extensive interviewing of clients, preparing factual affidavits, expert witness affidavits and testimony, investigation and evidence gathering, compilation and analysis of human rights / country-condition information and preparation of legal briefs. Many students work intensively on one or two cases; depending upon the number of credit hours, students may have different experiences including administrative hearings, federal court and administrative appellate brief writing, and regulatory reform and advocacy. The Women Refugees Project, an internationally recognized program, does groundbreaking work on women's international human rights and political asylum claims. Students may be involved in the development of position papers and innovative legal theories for amicus briefs in connection with political asylum claims filed around the country and, in some instances, before international tribunals.