According to the BIA, the “deliberate imposition of severe economic disadvantage or the deprivation of
liberty, food, housing, employment, or other essentials of life, may amount to persecution.”81 However,
under other circumstances, courts have held that the deprivation must be “so severe that [it] constitute[s] a
threat to an individual’s life or freedom.”82 In the context of statelessness, these types of deprivation may be
the only tangible evidence of persecution suffered by stateless people. The fact of their marginalization—
from education and livelihood, as well as restrictions on movement—may constitute the worst of the daily
persecution they suffer, because they may create intergenerational, extreme poverty and prevent stateless
people from achieving any sort of economic stability. It is critical to document and present how
marginalization may severely curtail the ability to provide for self and family, particularly in the absence of
specific violence and restrictions on liberty.
c. Discrimination and Harassment
Discrimination and harassment, in combination with other harms, may be sufficient to establish
persecution. According to the BIA, in extraordinary circumstances, severe and pervasive discrimination can
constitute persecution.83 In many States, stateless populations may be prohibited from attending school,
accessing health and social services, and availing themselves of protection and justice systems because of
their statelessness. As highlighted above, they often have difficulty accessing even their most basic rights.
Moreover, stateless persons are often members of ethnic or religious minority communities already
vulnerable to discrimination. These are important factors that should be documented and presented, as they
may cumulatively rise to the level of persecution. 84 It is also important to note that discrimination is often at
once the cause and effect, in the case of statelessness resulting from arbitrary deprivation of nationality.85
D. Nexus to a Protected Ground
Once persecution is established, proving eligibility for asylum under U.S. law requires a showing that the
entity that carried out the persecution did so because of—or “on account of”—one of the five protected
grounds for asylum: race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group.86
This element, “nexus requirement,” requires an examination of the motivation of the persecutor.
Practice Point
Another element of the claim that must be defined is the identity of the persecutor who has committed
the act. For asylum law purposes, the persecutor must be either the government entity or, in the case of a
non-state actor, someone who the government is unwilling or unable to control. In the context of
statelessness, because the question of deciding nationality is inherently a State function, the persecutor
will often be the government. However, some cases may involve abuse or discrimination on account of
an individual’s stateless status, in which case the persecutor may be a non-state actor.
Masieh v. INS, 73 F.3d 579, 583 (5th Cir. 1996) (quoting Matter of Laipenieks, 18 I&N Dec. 433 (BIA 1983)), rev’d on other grounds,
750 F.2d 1427 (9th Cir. 1985).
82 Matter of Acosta, 19 I&N Dec. 211, 222 (BIA 1985).
83 See Matter of Salama, 11 I&N Dec. 536 (BIA 1966) (finding that a government campaign of harassment urging the boycott of
Jewish doctors and other marginalization constituted persecution).
84 But see Ahmed v. Ashcroft, 341 F.3d 214, 218 (2003) (finding that a stateless individual who suffered discrimination in the
enjoyment of his rights as compared to the rest of the population was not sufficient to establish persecution).
85 See LAMBERT, supra note 61, at 14.
86 Note that some jurisdictions incorporate the persecutorial motive analysis into the persecution element of the claim.
81
18