Contributor: Under Trump, U.S. returns to treating violence against women as a ‘private matter’ – Los Angeles Times

 

Report on U.S. Asylum Policy for Gender-Based Violence and its Impact on Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction

An analysis of United States asylum policy reveals significant volatility regarding the protection of individuals fleeing gender-based violence. This inconsistency presents a substantial challenge to the advancement of several key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those concerning gender equality, justice, and reduced inequalities. Recent administrative rulings have sought to reverse decades of legal progress, threatening to undermine the nation’s alignment with global human rights standards and development objectives.

The Legal Framework for Asylum and its Intersection with SDG 5: Gender Equality

Defining Refugee Status

Under international and U.S. law, refugee status is granted to individuals with a well-founded fear of persecution based on one of five protected grounds:

1. Race
2. Religion
3. Nationality
4. Political opinion
5. Membership in a particular social group

The explicit omission of “gender” from this list has historically resulted in the denial of protection for women fleeing forms of persecution such as domestic violence, honor killings, and sexual slavery, with such cases often being miscategorized as “private” matters.

Gender as a “Particular Social Group”

The global recognition of “women’s rights are human rights,” which gained prominence at the 1993 Vienna Conference on Human Rights, marked a critical turning point. This paradigm shift directly supports the aims of SDG 5: Gender Equality, and specifically Target 5.2, which calls for the elimination of all forms of violence against all women and girls. In response, international bodies and national governments began to interpret “membership in a particular social group” to include gender, thereby extending protection to women facing gender-based persecution.

Historical Policy Fluctuations and Detriment to SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The vacillating nature of U.S. policy on this issue undermines SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions. The goal’s emphasis on promoting the rule of law and ensuring equal access to justice for all (Target 16.3) is compromised by inconsistent legal precedents and administrative instability.

Timeline of Key Developments

• 1995: The Department of Justice issued guidance for asylum officers to recognize the validity of gender-based claims, a positive step toward building just institutions.
• 1996: A landmark Board of Immigration Appeals decision granted asylum to a woman fleeing female genital cutting, establishing that gender-based claims could qualify under the “particular social group” category.
• 2014: A precedent-setting case affirmed that women fleeing domestic violence could be eligible for asylum, reinforcing protections.
• 2018: Attorney General Jeff Sessions reversed this progress, ruling that domestic violence was a “private” act, in direct repudiation of established human rights principles.
• 2021: Attorney General Merrick Garland vacated the 2018 ruling, restoring the 2014 precedent and protections for gender-based claims.

Analysis of Recent Rulings and Implications for SDG Targets

The “Matter of K-E-S-G-” Ruling

A recent ruling by the Board of Immigration Appeals, in the case known as Matter of K-E-S-G-, represents a significant regression. The decision holds that a “particular social group” cannot be defined by gender or by gender combined with nationality. This erects a formidable legal barrier for women and girls seeking asylum from gender-based violence and attempts to roll back decades of progress.

Direct Contradiction to Sustainable Development Goals

This ruling has profound negative implications for the achievement of the SDGs:

• SDG 5 (Gender Equality): By denying a critical pathway to safety, the ruling directly obstructs efforts to achieve Target 5.2 (eliminate violence against women). It effectively renders the suffering of women invisible within refugee law, perpetuating gender inequality.
• SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities): The policy creates discriminatory and unequal access to protection, contravening the principles of SDG 10. It undermines Target 10.7, which aims to facilitate orderly, safe, and responsible migration, by making the process more hazardous and uncertain for women.
• SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions): The ruling weakens legal and institutional frameworks designed to protect human rights, moving away from the goal of providing access to justice for all and building effective, accountable institutions.

Conclusion: The Imperative for Policy Coherence in Achieving Global Goals

Inconsistent and regressive asylum policies represent a significant obstacle to fulfilling the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. To align with international commitments, U.S. refugee law must provide stable, coherent, and just protection for all individuals fleeing persecution, including women and girls escaping gender-based violence. Reversing the recent detrimental rulings is imperative to ensure that the struggle for gender equality and human rights moves forward, in line with the core principles of the Sustainable Development Goals.

SDGs Addressed in the Article

SDG 5: Gender Equality

• The article’s central theme is the struggle for women’s rights within the U.S. refugee law system. It directly addresses the issue of gender-based violence, including domestic violence, honor killings, and female genital cutting, and whether women fleeing such persecution are entitled to protection. This aligns with the goal of achieving gender equality and ending violence against women. The text explicitly references the “struggle for gender equality” and the principle that “women’s rights are human rights.”

SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

• The article extensively discusses the legal and institutional frameworks governing refugee and asylum claims in the United States. It details the functioning of the Board of Immigration Appeals, the role of the Attorney General, and the impact of legal precedents and rulings on access to justice for a vulnerable group. The debate over interpreting refugee law to include or exclude gender-based claims is a direct reflection of the need for just, non-discriminatory, and effective institutions.

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

• The article highlights the inequality faced by women, particularly immigrant women, in accessing legal protection. The changing U.S. policies create a situation where a person’s ability to receive asylum is dependent on their gender and the political administration in power. The article discusses the attempt to “turn back history” and make women’s suffering “invisible in refugee law,” which speaks directly to reducing inequalities in outcomes and ensuring equal opportunity for protection under the law for migrants and refugees.

Specific SDG Targets Identified

SDG 5: Gender Equality

1. Target 5.1: End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere.

   The article discusses how the ruling in Matter of K-E-S-G-, which held that a “particular social group” cannot be defined by gender, constitutes a form of legal discrimination against women seeking asylum from gender-based violence.

2. Target 5.2: Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres.

   The article explicitly mentions forms of violence that women flee, such as “honor killings, female genital cutting, sexual slavery or domestic violence.” The core legal debate discussed is whether this violence, often categorized as “private,” should be grounds for international protection, thereby addressing its elimination.

3. Target 5.c: Adopt and strengthen sound policies and enforceable legislation for the promotion of gender equality.

   The entire article is a chronicle of the adoption, reversal, and reinstatement of policies and legal precedents concerning gender-based asylum claims. It highlights the 1995 Department of Justice guidance and the 2014 precedent as positive steps, and the Sessions and Trump administration rulings as steps backward, demonstrating the critical role of “sound policies and enforceable legislation.”

SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

1. Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere.

   The article describes the persecution women face, including “a decade of brutal beatings and death threats,” which directly relates to reducing violence and preventing death.

2. Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.

   The text focuses on the interpretation of U.S. and international refugee law and the struggle for women to have their claims heard fairly. The “waffling” of U.S. policy and the binding nature of rulings from the Board of Immigration Appeals directly impact “equal access to justice” for female asylum seekers.

3. Target 16.b: Promote and enforce non-discriminatory laws and policies for sustainable development.

   The article critiques the Trump administration’s ruling as a discriminatory policy that erects “an even higher barrier for women and girls fleeing persecution.” The call for “another reversal” is a call to enforce a non-discriminatory interpretation of refugee law.

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

1. Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices.

   The article details how different legal interpretations (policies) lead to unequal outcomes for women seeking asylum. The fight to vacate rulings like Jeff Sessions’ and the one in Matter of K-E-S-G- is an effort to eliminate a discriminatory practice and ensure women have an equal opportunity for protection.

2. Target 10.7: Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies.

   The article deals with a critical component of migration policy: asylum and refugee protection. The inconsistency in U.S. law creates an unpredictable and unsafe environment for women fleeing persecution, highlighting the need for a “well-managed” and just policy for this specific group of migrants.

Indicators for Measuring Progress

Implied Indicators from the Article

• Existence of legal frameworks and binding precedents that recognize gender as a basis for a refugee claim.

  The article tracks this directly by mentioning the 1995 DOJ guidance, the 1996 watershed decision, the 2014 precedent, and their subsequent reversals. The status of these legal instruments serves as a primary indicator of progress or regression.

• The outcome of specific, high-profile asylum cases involving gender-based violence.

  The article uses the cases of the Guatemalan woman (1999), Anabel (2018), and the ruling in Matter of K-E-S-G- as benchmarks to illustrate the application of U.S. asylum policy at different times. The granting or denial of asylum in such cases acts as a practical indicator of the system’s accessibility for women.

• Official recognition of the principle that “women’s rights are human rights” within national refugee law.

  The article contrasts the 1993 Vienna Conference’s affirmation of this principle with the Sessions’ ruling that characterized domestic violence as a “personal or private” matter. Whether national policy aligns with this international human rights principle is a key qualitative indicator.

Summary of Findings

SDGs	Targets	Indicators (Implied from Article)
SDG 5: Gender Equality	5.1: End all forms of discrimination against women. 5.2: Eliminate all forms of violence against women. 5.c: Adopt and strengthen sound policies and enforceable legislation for gender equality.	Existence of legal frameworks recognizing gender-based persecution (e.g., the 1995 DOJ guidance, 2014 precedent). Official policy alignment with the principle that “women’s rights are human rights.”
SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions	16.1: Reduce all forms of violence. 16.3: Promote the rule of law and ensure equal access to justice. 16.b: Promote and enforce non-discriminatory laws and policies.	The status (vacated or binding) of key Board of Immigration Appeals and Attorney General rulings. The outcome of asylum cases based on gender-based violence claims (e.g., Anabel’s case).
SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities	10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome by eliminating discriminatory policies. 10.7: Facilitate safe and responsible migration through well-managed policies.	Consistency and predictability of asylum law for women, regardless of the ruling administration. The legal ability for women to define their “particular social group” based on gender.

Source: latimes.com