Circuit split · immigration law
Whether an alien persecuted based purely on economic actions taken by private-sector (non-governmental) actors is eligible for asylum
1 federal appellate case on this question, each acknowledging the disagreement in its own words.
- Agbuya v. Immigration & Naturalization Service241 F3D 1224
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · July 18, 2000
“In holding that an alien who is persecuted based purely on economic actions taken in the private sector is eligible for asylum, the majority creates a split among the circuits.” — Creates a split
Empirical analysis of this case →
The other side of the split
Decisions the acknowledging court(s) named as the opposing or joined side, quoted in the acknowledging opinion's own words.
- On the other side · 7th Cir.Cuevas v. INS43 F.3d 1167
“The majority’s holding is inconsistent with the Seventh Circuit’s opinion in Cuevas v.” — Agbuya v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, acknowledging the split
- Discussed · 9th Cir.Desir v. Ilchert840 F.2d 723
- DiscussedBorja
“INS, 175 F.3d 732 , 734 (9th Cir.1999) (en banc), this court determined that an alien who was persecuted after she told armed NPA operatives that she would not join their organization because she was “pro-government,” had indeed been persecuted “on account of her political opinions.” The court went to great lengths to note Borja’s “outspoken political opinion,” and her drawing of “a political line in the sand.” Id.” — Agbuya v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, acknowledging the split
What the split turns on
- Anchor precedents:
- Elias-Zacarias502 U.S. 481
Cases are grouped by the legal question they announce a split on, classified from the court's own acknowledgment sentence. Verified acknowledgments only. Counter-side decisions are extracted from the acknowledging opinions' own text and linked only when the citation resolves in this corpus. See all circuit splits.