1982•bepress Legal RepositoryOpen access

Victims of Natural Disasters in U.S. Refugee Law and Policy

Janet L. Parker

Open full text 3 citations

Abstract

This note reviews the history and antecedents of subsection 203(a)(7)(B), suggests explanations for its repeal, and explores alternative relief for the individuals who might formerly have benefited from it. It is presumed that some victims of natural disasters have a need for refuge equal to that of the refugee fleeing persecution. This is not to say that every "catastrophic natural calamity," as the now defunct statutory formulation put it, produces victims requiring the extraordinary relief of asylum. Yet, when the disaster constitutes a continuing threat to human life, and aid to the stricken area cannot restore an acceptable standard of living, then the distinction between natural disaster victims and refugees fearing persecution becomes arbitrary and inhumane. The humanitarian underpinnings of a special provision for persons in life-threatening situations apply regardless of the source of that threat.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This note reviews the history and antecedents of subsection 203(a)(7)(B), suggests explanations for its repeal, and explores alternative relief for the individuals who might formerly have benefited from it. It is presumed that some victims of natural disasters have a need for refuge equal to that of the refugee fleeing persecution. This is not to say that every "catastrophic natural calamity," as the now defunct statutory formulation put it, produces victims requiring the extraordinary relief of asylum. Yet, when the disaster constitutes a continuing threat to human life, and aid to the stricken area cannot restore an acceptable standard of living, then the distinction between natural disaster victims and refugees fearing persecution becomes arbitrary and inhumane. The humanitarian underpinnings of a special provision for persons in life-threatening situations apply regardless of the source of that threat.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This note reviews the history and antecedents of subsection 203(a)(7)(B), suggests explanations for its repeal, and explores alternative relief for the individuals who might formerly have benefited from it. It is presumed that some victims of natural disasters have a need for refuge equal to that of the refugee fleeing persecution. This is not to say that every "catastrophic natural calamity," as the now defunct statutory formulation put it, produces victims requiring the extraordinary relief of asylum. Yet, when the disaster constitutes a continuing threat to human life, and aid to the stricken area cannot restore an acceptable standard of living, then the distinction between natural disaster victims and refugees fearing persecution becomes arbitrary and inhumane. The humanitarian underpinnings of a special provision for persons in life-threatening situations apply regardless of the source of that threat.

Key concepts: Refugee, Natural disaster, Refugee law, Political science, Law, Criminology, Geography, Sociology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Victims of Natural Disasters in U.S. Refugee Law and Policy — Research Paper | ScholarLens