[ad_1]
An interesting case was recently issued by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals regarding the basic eligibility requirements for asylum. In that case, the German citizen fled his country and applied for asylum in the US based on his belief that Germany’s ban on homeschooling could be considered a reasonable fear of future persecution.
Generally, an applicant’s claim for asylum must be based on one of five grounds: religion, nationality, political opinion, membership in a particular social group, and/or race. In the present case, the applicants state that they fear future persecution due to the German government implementing a law banning homeschooling for children. In particular, they argue that forcing their children to attend public schools will expose their children to values that are anti-Christian, and thus they argue that they have a risk of future persecution on religious grounds. Justified fear.
Although the immigration judge initially approved the asylum application, the Board of Immigration Appeals reversed the judge’s decision and denied the asylum application. The case was appealed to the Sixth Circuit Court, and in its ruling, the Court ruled that the applicants were not eligible for asylum. Since there is generally applicable law in Germany requiring all children to attend public schools or state-supported private schools, the Court held that the German government was not selectively penalizing applicants. The Court noted that the German government, in enforcing the law by imposing heavy fines on the applicants, was merely enforcing its own laws and was not harassing the applicants for any other reason than that it is the law in Germany. .
The Court says that for applicants to win their asylum case, they must show that German authorities more strictly enforced the law on faith-based homeschooling families and that punishment was more severe for faith-based homeschooling families. In the present case, the family was imposed the same penalty as any other family who failed to get their children admitted in a government school.
This case may be considered a precedent for applicants both inside and outside the jurisdiction of the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals because of the underlying decision issued by the Board of Immigration Appeals. The instant case makes it clear that the Court will not consider the underlying grounds of Germany’s law that prohibits homeschooling, but rather whether that law distinguishes a protected group on the basis of the five grounds for asylum outlined above.
[ad_2]
