The Supreme Court held that asylum’s well-founded-fear standard is different from the higher probability standard for withholding of deportation. This historical distinction does not guarantee either form of protection.
The Court rejected requiring an asylum applicant to show persecution was more likely than not. It interpreted the statutory distinction between discretionary asylum and withholding, rather than granting every applicant relief.
Read the opinion with INA §208 and the withholding provisions of INA §241. Form I-589 can involve different protection requests; eligibility, bars, evidence and later governing authority require separate analysis.
U.S. Government
General reference information, not legal advice. A summary does not replace the statute or full decision. Check applicability and subsequent developments before filing. Publication does not imply attorney legal review or create an attorney-client relationship.
The Supreme Court held that asylum’s well-founded-fear standard is different from the higher probability standard for withholding of deportation. This historical distinction does not guarantee either form of protection.
Read the opinion with INA §208 and the withholding provisions of INA §241. Form I-589 can involve different protection requests; eligibility, bars, evidence and later governing authority require separate analysis.