Document Type

Article

Publication Title

University of Chicago Law Review

Abstract

The legal debates over these repatriations and the appropriate state policies toward the flow of emigrants have focused on the process for assessing claims of persecution, on the nature of "voluntary" repatriation programs implemented by recipient countries, and on the extent of oppression in the countries from which the emigrants fled. These debates, however, have neglected the interdependent effects that the quality of screening of immigrants and the repatriation policy have on the flow of emigrants. In this Article, we argue that an understanding of these effects is crucial to an evaluation of state policies. Part I sets out the theoretical argument. In particular, we demonstrate that a restrictive immigration policy that inadequately distinguishes political from economic refugees may disproportionately discourage those with a well-founded fear of persecution from flight. A failure to recognize this effect may lead to a misevaluation of state policy. Part II analyzes recent U.S. policy toward Haitians. We present evidence concerning the extent of political persecution in Haiti and the quality of screening procedures used by the United States. This evidence bears on the evaluation of U.S. policy not only directly but also indirectly through the effect described in Part I. Readers averse to formal argument may prefer to read Part II first.

First Page

1421

DOI

https://doi.org/10.2307/1600006

Volume

59

Publication Date

1992

Download

Share

COinS