Refugee roulette: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 06:35, 3 September 2024

Refugee roulette refers to arbitrariness in the process of refugee status determinations or, as it is called in the United States, asylum adjudication. Recent research suggests that at least in the United States and Canada, the outcome of asylum determinations largely depends upon the identity of the particular adjudicator to whom an application is randomly assigned, and that the resulting disparities in rates of granting asylum are problematic.^[1] On the other hand, some commentators state that a good deal of disparity is inevitable and that refugees and their advocates must "learn to live" with "unequal justice".^[2] Others report that the amount of disparity diminished after 2008.^[3]

The original study that coined the term "refugee roulette" presents an empirical analysis of decision-making at all four levels of the asylum process, namely the asylum office of the Department of Homeland Security, the immigration courts of the Department of Justice, the Board of Immigration Appeals, and the United States Courts of Appeals, between 2000 and 2004.^[4] The authors argue that their findings reveal an unacceptable level of disparities in grant rates, noting that the asylum adjudicators studied heard large numbers of cases from the same country in the same location over the same period of time. The study concludes with recommendations for reforming the immigration adjudication system. In a 2008 study of immigration court decision-making between 1994 and 2007, the United States Government Accountability Office found that "the likelihood of being granted asylum varied considerably across and within the [immigration courts studied]."^[5]

The findings of the original "Refugee Roulette" study were reported as the lead story on the front page of The New York Times on May 31, 2007.^[6] The study was also reported in the Atlantic Monthly^[7] and many other media outlets, including the Atlanta Journal-Constitution,^[8] the Christian Science Monitor,^[9] the Dallas Morning News,^[10] and the Miami Herald.^[11] The study has been cited by numerous prominent legal academics, including Prof. David Cole of the Georgetown University Law Center,^[12] Judith Resnik,^[13] and Cass Sunstein.^[14] It was also discussed in a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.^[15] The study has been cited by the American Bar Association's Commission on Immigration^[16] and the Appleseed Foundation,^[17] among other organizations.^[18] A similar study of the Canadian asylum adjudication system was subsequently published.^[19]

The term "refugee roulette" continues to be used by the popular media to describe arbitrariness in asylum adjudication.^[20]

References

^ Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Andrew I. Schoenholtz, and Philip G. Schrag, Refugee Roulette: Disparities in Asylum Adjudication, 60 Stan. L. Rev. 295 (2007); Government Accountability Office, U.S. Asylum System: Significant Variation Existed in Asylum Outcomes across Immigration Courts and Judges (2008); Charlie Savage, Vetted judges more likely to reject asylum bids, N.Y. Times (Aug. 23, 2009); Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Andrew I. Schoenholtz, and Philip G. Schrag, Refugee Roulette: Disparities in Asylum Adjudication and Proposals for Reform (NYU Press 2009).
^ Stephen Legomsky, Learning to Live with Unequal Justice: Asylum and the Limits to Consistency, 60 Stan. L. Rev. 413(2007).
^ Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, Latest Data from Immigration Courts Show Decline in Disparity (2009).
^ Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Andrew I. Schoenholtz, and Philip G. Schrag, Refugee Roulette: Disparities in Asylum Adjudication, 60 Stan. L. Rev. 295 (2007); Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Andrew I. Schoenholtz, and Philip G. Schrag, Refugee Roulette: Disparities in Asylum Adjudication and Proposals for Reform (NYU Press 2009).
^ Government Accountability Office, U.S. Asylum System: Significant Variation Existed in Asylum Outcomes across Immigration Courts and Judges (2008)
^ Julia Preston, Big Disparities in Judging of Asylum Cases, N.Y. Times (May 31, 2007); see also Charlie Savage, Vetted judges more likely to reject asylum bids, N.Y. Times (Aug. 23, 2009)
^ Random Justice, Atlantic Monthly (Oct. 2007)
^ Anna Varela, Asylum a tough sell in Atlanta, Atlanta Journal-Constitution (July 29, 2007)
^ Bill Frogameni, For asylum seekers, a fickle system, Christian Science Monitor (July 3, 2007)
^ Todd Robberson, Asylum seekers are at mercy of inconsistent courts, study says, Dallas Morning News (June 1, 2007)
^ Lesley Clark, Miami judges less likely to grant asylum, Miami Herald (May 31, 2007)
^ David Cole, Out of the Shadows: Preventive Detention, Suspected Terrorists, and War, 97 Cal. L. Rev. 693 (2009)
^ Judith Resnik, Detention, the War on Terror, and the Federal Courts, 110 Colum. L. Rev. 579 (2010)
^ Thomas J. Miles & Cass R. Sunstein, The Real World of Arbitrariness Review, 75 U. Chi. L. Rev. 831 (2008)
^ Zuh v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 504, 513 (4th Cir. 2008)
^ American Bar Association Commission on Immigration, Reforming the Immigration System: Proposals to Promote Independence, Fairness, Efficiency, and Professionalism in the Adjudication of Removal Cases (2010)
^ Appleseed, Assembly Line Injustice: Blueprint to Reform America's Immigration Courts (2009)
^ Human Rights First, Locked Up Far Away: The Transfer of Immigrants to Remote Detention Centers in the United States (2009)
^ Sean Rehaag, Troubling Patterns in Canadian Refugee Adjudication, 39 Ottawa L. Rev. 335 (2008)
^ Lauren Gelfond Feldinger, Helping Israel avoid ‘refugee roulette’, Jerusalem Post (Nov. 24, 2009); David McKie, Fluctuations in refugee rulings trouble critics, Canadian Broadcasting Centre News (Dec. 17, 2009); Andrea Saenz, U.S. funds immigration cops, but not courts, Harvard Law Record (March 11, 2010)

External links

The authors of the original "Refugee Roulette" study in the United States: Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Andrew I. Schoenholtz, Philip G. Schrag

[1] Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Andrew I. Schoenholtz, and Philip G. Schrag, Refugee Roulette: Disparities in Asylum Adjudication, 60 Stan. L. Rev. 295 (2007); Government Accountability Office, U.S. Asylum System: Significant Variation Existed in Asylum Outcomes across Immigration Courts and Judges (2008); Charlie Savage, Vetted judges more likely to reject asylum bids, N.Y. Times (Aug. 23, 2009); Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Andrew I. Schoenholtz, and Philip G. Schrag, Refugee Roulette: Disparities in Asylum Adjudication and Proposals for Reform (NYU Press 2009).

[2] Stephen Legomsky, Learning to Live with Unequal Justice: Asylum and the Limits to Consistency, 60 Stan. L. Rev. 413(2007).

[3] Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, Latest Data from Immigration Courts Show Decline in Disparity (2009).

[4] Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Andrew I. Schoenholtz, and Philip G. Schrag, Refugee Roulette: Disparities in Asylum Adjudication, 60 Stan. L. Rev. 295 (2007); Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Andrew I. Schoenholtz, and Philip G. Schrag, Refugee Roulette: Disparities in Asylum Adjudication and Proposals for Reform (NYU Press 2009).

[5] Government Accountability Office, U.S. Asylum System: Significant Variation Existed in Asylum Outcomes across Immigration Courts and Judges (2008)

[6] Julia Preston, Big Disparities in Judging of Asylum Cases, N.Y. Times (May 31, 2007); see also Charlie Savage, Vetted judges more likely to reject asylum bids, N.Y. Times (Aug. 23, 2009)

[7] Random Justice, Atlantic Monthly (Oct. 2007)

[8] Anna Varela, Asylum a tough sell in Atlanta, Atlanta Journal-Constitution (July 29, 2007)

[9] Bill Frogameni, For asylum seekers, a fickle system, Christian Science Monitor (July 3, 2007)

[10] Todd Robberson, Asylum seekers are at mercy of inconsistent courts, study says, Dallas Morning News (June 1, 2007)

[11] Lesley Clark, Miami judges less likely to grant asylum, Miami Herald (May 31, 2007)

[12] David Cole, Out of the Shadows: Preventive Detention, Suspected Terrorists, and War, 97 Cal. L. Rev. 693 (2009)

[13] Judith Resnik, Detention, the War on Terror, and the Federal Courts, 110 Colum. L. Rev. 579 (2010)

[14] Thomas J. Miles & Cass R. Sunstein, The Real World of Arbitrariness Review, 75 U. Chi. L. Rev. 831 (2008)

[15] Zuh v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 504, 513 (4th Cir. 2008)

[16] American Bar Association Commission on Immigration, Reforming the Immigration System: Proposals to Promote Independence, Fairness, Efficiency, and Professionalism in the Adjudication of Removal Cases (2010)

[17] Appleseed, Assembly Line Injustice: Blueprint to Reform America's Immigration Courts (2009)

[18] Human Rights First, Locked Up Far Away: The Transfer of Immigrants to Remote Detention Centers in the United States (2009)

[19] Sean Rehaag, Troubling Patterns in Canadian Refugee Adjudication, 39 Ottawa L. Rev. 335 (2008)

[20] Lauren Gelfond Feldinger, Helping Israel avoid ‘refugee roulette’, Jerusalem Post (Nov. 24, 2009); David McKie, Fluctuations in refugee rulings trouble critics, Canadian Broadcasting Centre News (Dec. 17, 2009); Andrea Saenz, U.S. funds immigration cops, but not courts, Harvard Law Record (March 11, 2010)

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{short description|Randomness in the determination of refugee status}}
-{{multiple issues|orphan =April 2010|POV =April 2010|essay =April 2010}}
+'''Refugee roulette''' refers to arbitrariness in the process of [[refugee]] status determinations or, as it is called in the [[United States]], [[Right of asylum|asylum]] adjudication.  Recent research suggests that at least in the United States and [[Canada]], the outcome of asylum determinations largely depends upon the identity of the particular adjudicator to whom an application is randomly assigned, and that the resulting disparities in rates of granting asylum are problematic.<ref>Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Andrew I. Schoenholtz, and Philip G. Schrag, [https://ssrn.com/abstract=983946 Refugee Roulette: Disparities in Asylum Adjudication], 60 Stan. L. Rev. 295 (2007); Government Accountability Office, [http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08940.pdf U.S. Asylum System: Significant Variation Existed in Asylum Outcomes across Immigration Courts and Judges] (2008); Charlie Savage, [https://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/washington/24judges.html?pagewanted=all Vetted judges more likely to reject asylum bids], N.Y. Times (Aug. 23, 2009); Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Andrew I. Schoenholtz, and Philip G. Schrag, [http://www.nyupress.org/books/Refugee_Roulette-products_id-11110.html Refugee Roulette: Disparities in Asylum Adjudication and Proposals for Reform] (NYU Press 2009).</ref>  On the other hand, some commentators state that a good deal of disparity is inevitable and that refugees and their advocates must "learn to live" with "unequal justice".<ref>Stephen Legomsky, [https://ssrn.com/abstract=1085265 Learning to Live with Unequal Justice: Asylum and the Limits to Consistency], 60 Stan. L. Rev. 413(2007).</ref>  Others report that the amount of disparity diminished after 2008.<ref>[[Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse]], [http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/209/ Latest Data from Immigration Courts Show Decline in Disparity] (2009).</ref>
+The original study that coined the term "refugee [[roulette]]" presents an empirical analysis of decision-making at all four levels of the asylum process, namely the asylum office of the [[Department of homeland security|Department of Homeland Security]], [[Executive Office for Immigration Review|the immigration courts]] of the [[United States Department of Justice|Department of Justice]], the [[Board of immigration appeals|Board of Immigration Appeals]], and the [[United States court of appeals|United States Courts of Appeals]], between 2000 and 2004.<ref>Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Andrew I. Schoenholtz, and Philip G. Schrag, [https://ssrn.com/abstract=983946 Refugee Roulette: Disparities in Asylum Adjudication], 60 Stan. L. Rev. 295 (2007); Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Andrew I. Schoenholtz, and Philip G. Schrag, [http://www.nyupress.org/books/Refugee_Roulette-products_id-11110.html Refugee Roulette: Disparities in Asylum Adjudication and Proposals for Reform] (NYU Press 2009).</ref>  The authors argue that their findings reveal an unacceptable level of disparities in grant rates, noting that the asylum adjudicators studied heard large numbers of cases from the same country in the same location over the same period of time.  The study concludes with recommendations for reforming the immigration adjudication system.  In a 2008 study of immigration court decision-making between 1994 and 2007, the United States [[Government accountability office|Government Accountability Office]] found that "the likelihood of being granted asylum varied considerably across and within the [immigration courts studied]."<ref>Government Accountability Office, [http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08940.pdf U.S. Asylum System: Significant Variation Existed in Asylum Outcomes across Immigration Courts and Judges] (2008)</ref>
-{{New unreviewed article|source=ArticleWizard|date=April 2010}}
+The findings of the original "Refugee Roulette" study were reported as the lead story on the front page of ''[[The New York Times]]'' on May 31, 2007.<ref>Julia Preston, [https://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/31/washington/31asylum.html?_r=3&pagewanted=1&hp Big Disparities in Judging of Asylum Cases], N.Y. Times (May 31, 2007); see also Charlie Savage, [https://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/washington/24judges.html?pagewanted=all Vetted judges more likely to reject asylum bids], N.Y. Times (Aug. 23, 2009)</ref>  The study was also reported in the ''[[Atlantic Monthly]]''<ref>[https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2007/10/primary-sources/6174/ Random Justice], Atlantic Monthly (Oct. 2007)</ref> and many other media outlets, including the ''[[Atlanta Journal-Constitution]]'',<ref>Anna Varela, Asylum a tough sell in Atlanta, Atlanta Journal-Constitution (July 29, 2007)</ref> the ''[[Christian Science Monitor]]'',<ref>Bill Frogameni, For asylum seekers, a fickle system, Christian Science Monitor (July 3, 2007)</ref>  the ''[[Dallas Morning News]]'',<ref>Todd Robberson, Asylum seekers are at mercy of inconsistent courts, study says, Dallas Morning News (June 1, 2007)</ref> and the ''[[Miami Herald]]''.<ref>Lesley Clark, Miami judges less likely to grant asylum, Miami Herald (May 31, 2007)</ref>  The study has been cited by numerous prominent legal academics, including Prof. David Cole of the [[Georgetown University Law Center]],<ref>[http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/cole/cole.htm David Cole], [http://www.californialawreview.org/3out-of-the-shadows-preventive-detention-suspected-terrorists-and-war/ Out of the Shadows: Preventive Detention, Suspected Terrorists, and War], 97 Cal. L. Rev. 693 (2009)</ref> [[Judith Resnik (lawyer)|Judith Resnik]],<ref>[http://www.law.yale.edu/faculty/JResnik.htm Judith Resnik], [http://www.columbialawreview.org/articles/detention-the-war-on-terror-and-the-federal-courts Detention, the War on Terror, and the Federal Courts], 110 Colum. L. Rev. 579 (2010)</ref>  and [[Cass Sunstein]].<ref>Thomas J. Miles & Cass R. Sunstein, [http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2664&context=journal_articles The Real World of Arbitrariness Review],  75 U. Chi. L. Rev. 831 (2008)</ref>  It was also discussed in a decision of the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit]].<ref>Zuh v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 504, 513 (4th Cir. 2008)</ref>  The study has been cited by the [[American Bar Association]]'s Commission on Immigration<ref>American Bar Association Commission on Immigration, [http://www.abanet.org/media/nosearch/immigration_reform_executive_summary_012510.pdf Reforming the Immigration System: Proposals to Promote Independence, Fairness, Efficiency, and Professionalism in the Adjudication of Removal Cases] (2010)</ref> and the [[Appleseed Foundation]],<ref>Appleseed, [http://appleseednetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Assembly-Line-Injustice-Blueprint-to-Reform-Americas-Immigration-Courts1.pdf Assembly Line Injustice: Blueprint to Reform America's Immigration Courts] (2009)</ref> among other organizations.<ref>Human Rights First, [https://www.hrw.org/en/node/86760/section/1 Locked Up Far Away: The Transfer of Immigrants to Remote Detention Centers in the United States] (2009)</ref>  A similar study of the Canadian asylum adjudication system was subsequently published.<ref>Sean Rehaag, [https://ssrn.com/abstract=1468717 Troubling Patterns in Canadian Refugee Adjudication], 39 Ottawa L. Rev. 335 (2008)</ref>
-'''Refugee [[roulette]]''' refers to arbitrariness in the process of [[refugee]] status determinations or, as it is called in the [[United States]], [[Right of asylum|asylum]] adjudication.  Recent research asserts that at least in the United States and [[Canada]], the outcome of asylum determinations depends in large part on the identity of the particular adjudicator to whom an application is randomly assigned.<ref>Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Andrew I. Schoenholtz, and Philip G. Schrag, [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=983946 Refugee Roulette: Disparities in Asylum Adjudication], 60 Stan.L. Rev. 295 (2007); Government Accountability Office, [http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08940.pdf U.S. Asylum System: Significant Variation Existed in Asylum Outcomes across Immigration Courts and Judges] (2008); Charlie Savage, [http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/washington/24judges.html?pagewanted=all Vetted judges more likely to reject asylum bids], N.Y. Times (Aug. 23, 2009); Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Andrew I. Schoenholtz, and Philip G. Schrag, [http://www.nyupress.org/books/Refugee_Roulette-products_id-11110.html Refugee Roulette: Disparities in Asylum Adjudication and Proposals for Reform] (NYU Press 2009).</ref>   On the other hand, some commentators claim that a good deal of disparity is inevitable and that refugees and their advocates must “learn to live” with “unequal justice.”<ref>Stephen Legomsky, [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1085265 Learning to Live with Unequal Justice: Asylum and the Limits to Consistency], 60 Stan. L. Rev. 413(2007).</ref>  Others believe that the amount of disparity diminished after 2008. <ref>Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, [http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/209/ Latest Data from Immigration Courts Show Decline in Disparity] (2009).</ref>
+The term "refugee roulette" continues to be used by the popular media to describe arbitrariness in asylum adjudication.<ref>Lauren Gelfond Feldinger, [http://www.jpost.com/Features/Helping-Israel-avoid-refugee-roulette Helping Israel avoid ‘refugee roulette’], Jerusalem Post (Nov. 24, 2009); David McKie, [https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/fluctuations-in-refugee-rulings-trouble-critics-1.850874 Fluctuations in refugee rulings trouble critics], Canadian Broadcasting Centre News (Dec. 17, 2009); Andrea Saenz, [http://hlrecord.org/2010/03/u-s-funds-immigration-cops-but-not-courts/ U.S. funds immigration cops, but not courts], ''[[Harvard Law Record]]'' (March 11, 2010)</ref>
-The original study that coined the term "refugee roulette" presents an empirical analysis of decision-making at all four levels of the asylum process, namely the asylum office of the [[Department of homeland security|Department of Homeland Security]], [[Executive Office for Immigration Review|the immigration courts]] of the Department of Justice, the [[Board of immigration appeals|Board of Immigration Appeals]], and the [[United States court of appeals|United States Courts of Appeals]].  The authors argue that their findings reveal tremendous disparities in grant rates even between adjudicators who hear large numbers of cases from the same country in the same location over the same period of time.  The study concludes with recommendations for reforming the immigration adjudication system.
+== See also ==
-The findings of the study were reported as the lead story on the front page of the New York Times on May 31, 2007.<ref>Julia Preston, [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/31/washington/31asylum.html?_r=3&pagewanted=1&hp Big Disparities in Judging of Asylum Cases], N.Y. Times (May 31, 2007); see also Charlie Savage, [http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/washington/24judges.html?pagewanted=all Vetted judges more likely to reject asylum bids], N.Y. Times (Aug. 23, 2009)</ref>   The study was also reported in the Atlantic Monthly<ref>[http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2007/10/primary-sources/6174/ Random Justice], Atlantic Monthly (Oct. 2007)</ref> and many other media outlets, including the Atlanta Journal and Constitution,<ref>Anna Varela, Asylum a tough sell in Atlanta, Atlanta Journal-Constitution (July 29, 2007)</ref> the Christian Science Monitor,<ref>Bill Frogameni, For asylum seekers, a fickle system, Christian Science Monitor (July 3, 2007)</ref>  the Dallas Morning News,<ref>Todd Robberson, Asylum seekers are at mercy of inconsistent courts, study says, Dallas Morning News (June 1, 2007)</ref>  and the Miami Herald.<ref>Lesley Clark, Miami judges less likely to grant asylum, Miami Herald (May 31, 2007)</ref>   The study has been cited by numerous prominent legal academics, including Prof. David Cole of the Georgetown University Law Center,<ref>[http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/cole/cole.htm David Cole], [http://www.californialawreview.org/articles/out-of-the-shadows-preventive-detention-suspected-terrorists-and-war Out of the Shadows: Preventive Detention, Suspected Terrorists, and War], 97 Cal. L. Rev. 693 (2009)</ref> Prof. Judith Resnik of the Yale Law School,<ref>[http://www.law.yale.edu/faculty/JResnik.htm Judith Resnik], [http://www.columbialawreview.org/articles/detention-the-war-on-terror-and-the-federal-courts Detention, the War on Terror, and the Federal Courts], 110 Colum. L. Rev. 579 (2010)</ref>  and Prof. [[Cass Sunstein]] of the Harvard Law School.<ref>Thomas J. Miles & Cass R. Sunstein, [http://lawreview.uchicago.edu/issues/archive/v75/75_2/Miles75-2.pdf The Real World of Arbitrariness Review],  75 U. Chi. L. Rev. 831 (2008)</ref>  It was also discussed in a decision of the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit]].<ref>Zuh v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 504, 513 (4th Cir. 2008)</ref>   The study has been cited by the United States [[Government accountability office|Government Accountability Office]],<ref>Government Accountability Office, [http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08940.pdf U.S. Asylum System: Significant Variation Existed in Asylum Outcomes across Immigration Courts and Judges] (2008)</ref> which confirmed many of its findings in a separate study, as well as the [[American Bar Association]]’s Commission on Immigration<ref>American Bar Association Commission on Immigration, [http://www.abanet.org/media/nosearch/immigration_reform_executive_summary_012510.pdf Reforming the Immigration System: Proposals to Promote Independence, Fairness, Efficiency, and Professionalism in the Adjudication of Removal Cases] (2010)</ref> and the [[Appleseed Foundation]],<ref>Appleseed, [http://www.appleseednetwork.org/Portals/0/Documents/Publications/Chapter%201.pdf Assembly Line Injustice: Blueprint to Reform America's Immigration Courts] (2009)</ref> among other organizations.<ref>Human Rights First, [http://www.hrw.org/en/node/86760/section/1 Locked Up Far Away: The Transfer of Immigrants to Remote Detention Centers in the United States] (2009)</ref>   A similar study of the Canadian asylum adjudication system was subsequently published.<ref>Sean Rehaag, [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1468717 Troubling Patterns in Canadian Refugee Adjudication], 39 Ottawa L. Rev. 335 (2008)</ref>
+{{col div|colwidth=30em}}
+*[[Administrative law]]
-The term “refugee roulette” continues to be used by the popular media to describe arbitrariness in asylum adjudication.<ref>Lauren Gelfond Feldinger, [http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=1&cid=1258705173915&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull Helping Israel avoid ‘refugee roulette’], Jerusalem Post (Nov. 24, 2009); David McKie, [http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2009/12/17/f-refugee-claims.html Fluctuations in refugee rulings trouble critics], Canadian Broadcasting Centre News (Dec. 17, 2009); Andrea Saenz, [http://www.hlrecord.org/opinion/u-s-funds-immigration-cops-but-not-courts-1.1265255 U.S. funds immigration cops, but not courts], ''[[Harvard Law Record]]'' (March 11, 2010)</ref>
+*[[Asylum seekers]]
+*[[Asylum shopping]]
+*[[Refugee]]
+*[[Refugee law]]
+*[[Right of asylum]]
+*[[Refugee employment]]
+{{colend}}
 == References ==
 <!--- See [[Wikipedia:Footnotes]] on how to create references using <ref></ref> tags which will then appear here automatically -->
 {{Reflist}}
-== See also ==
-*[[Asylum shopping]]
 == External links ==
-The authors of the study: [http://www.law.temple.edu/servlet/com.rnci.products.DataModules.RetrievePage?site=TempleLaw&page=N_Faculty_Ramji_Nogales_Biography Jaya Ramji-Nogales], [http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/facinfo/tab_faculty.cfm?Status=Faculty&ID=1269 Andrew I. Schoenholtz], [http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/facinfo/tab_faculty.cfm?Status=Faculty&ID=324 Philip G. Schrag]
+The authors of the original "Refugee Roulette" study in the United States: [http://www.law.temple.edu/pages/Faculty/N_Faculty_Ramji_Nogales_Main.aspx Jaya Ramji-Nogales], [http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/facinfo/tab_faculty.cfm?Status=Faculty&ID=1269 Andrew I. Schoenholtz], [http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/facinfo/tab_faculty.cfm?Status=Faculty&ID=324 Philip G. Schrag]
 {{DEFAULTSORT:Refugee Roulette}}
-[[Category:Immigration to the United States]]
+[[Category:Right of asylum in the United States]]