Asylum backed for woman opposing childbirth policy (Chinese one-child/abortion policy)

San Jose Mercury News ^ | 30 January 2004 | Jessie Mangaliman

[CounterCounterCulture]

Asylum backed for woman opposing childbirth policy

A Chinese woman who was subjected to a harrowing medical examination after expressing her objection to China's one-child policy should be granted political asylum in the United States, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling broadens the legal definition of political persecution, said Robert Jobe, a San Francisco attorney who represented the woman.

Asylum seekers from China who can prove that they've been forced to undergo abortion or sterilization are granted political asylum in the United States.

But in its ruling, the court judges said the woman, Xu Ming Li, in her 20s, deserves asylum for resisting China's tough population-control edict of one-child per family.

Li and her boyfriend Xin Kui Yu, also in his 20s, arrived in San Francisco in 1999 from the southern China province of Fujian. They immediately sought asylum but were denied.

In China, Li was forced to undergo a gynecological examination in which she was held down by two men. Chinese officials allegedly threatened that if she got pregnant she would be forced to have an abortion, and her boyfriend would be sterilized.

The couple were ordered deported by U.S. immigration officials in January 2000. The couple then appealed before the 9th Circuit Court. Yu's case is still being reviewed.

-- Jessie Mangaliman

[thoughtomator]

We send people back to countries where they are tortured and killed all the time. This is not the equivalent of saying that we support torture and murder.

The rule of law is not perfect, but it's better than any other method ever tried by mankind. Let's face it, if this were Egypt with this policy rather than China, people here on FR would be hysterical over this, and give the usual "9th Circus" cries of outrage.

If you feel that a different standard than what the law says is in order, then you are well within your rights to advocate that standard. However, the 9th Circuit is not a "superlegislature", nor is any other court, and it cannot rewrite the law to please itself, or to please anyone else.

It is not useful to imagine that policies have no consequences. In this case, the consequence is that we are giving basically the entire population of China an invitation to come to the US and claim asylum. This is not the intent of our asylum laws; if it were, they would never have made it past Congress, under either Democrat or Republican rule.

Whatever our standard is, the law should reflect it.

[tiamat]

Everybody here who is pro-life OUGHT to be supporting the asylum. You cannot have it both ways. You cannot say, "Abortion is wrong", on the one hand and then refuse to help someone who is trying to avoid an abortion.

Does a Chinese baby have less of a soul than an American baby? The Church ought to be backing this and sponsoring these women.

And , BTW, I agree. A lot of these folks DO become better Americans than many of our own "citizens". They work hard, make their children study and often succeed within the first generation.

Tia

[PRND21]

bttt

[hchutch]

Agreed.

[hchutch]

The other thing to note was that this brave woman probably feel into the "other resistance" category. She clearly was resisting the barbaric policy of the People's Republic of China.

If anything, if you want the definition of "other resistance" changed, then YOU are the one who needs to ask Congress to change the law to eliminate that. The Ninth Circuit got this one right. It occasionally happens.

[hchutch]

Actually, the Ninth got this one right. I guess UNWANTED abortion is something they cannot stand.

I think that sexual assault for her vocal resistance to the policy also played a role. And she put up a fight, too.

[Poohbah]

Here's your water to wash your hands, Mr. Pilate.

[nickcarraway]

BUMP

[nickcarraway]

The Founding Fathers didn't form this nation to support communism, either.

[nickcarraway]

Hmmm, so you are one of those types who believe only the Indians should live here. Mostly everyone else came here for religious or other freedoms.

[nickcarraway]

ping

[nickcarraway]

ping

[thoughtomator]

I think you two are somehow inferring that I don't think that forced abortions are a horrible thing. I happen to be quite the pro-life absolutist, for your information, and that is not my basis for skepticism in this case.

You see, I handle asylum claims every single day. We have clients who have gone through far worse - torture, rape, indefinite detention, house/store burnings, whole families killed. None of these people get an easy ride in on asylum.

You either don't realize the implications of what you are saying, or you're in a tiny minority on FR, because if we are to accept every bleeding-heart story as a valid asylum claim, it's an open invitation to the entire world to settle here. Things are much worse in most of the countries on the planet than you may realize - an asylum policy based on sympathy is a call to have several billion people live in the USA. Do you really want that?

[CounterCounterCulture]

I have a solution for the immigration fear-mongers..

• for every Xu Ming Li that comes over from China, we send back an Rosie O'Donnell.

• for every Elian Gonzalez that comes over from Cuba, we send back a Martin Sheen.

• for every Mgome that comes over from The Sudan, we send back a Jesse Jackson.

...and so on and so forth.

In the end we get better Americans and the leftist pukes get to experience something other than the freedoms they took for granted ;-)

[tiamat]

I like it!

;-)

Tia

[thoughtomator]

I'd take that one in a heartbeat