Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 53 (2021) Ghosts in America: Working Towards Building a Legal Framework for Stateless Individuals in the United States habitually resided.” 166 They must also establish persecution or a wellfounded fear of persecution in such country of last habitual residence.167 While a stateless individual may be recognized as a refugee under United States law, 168 they encounter a myriad of challenges because of their stateless status. 169 First, while United States courts have recognized that statelessness may be a contributing factor for establishing asylum eligibility, United States courts have generally held that statelessness alone is not an independent ground for establishing asylum eligibility. 170 For example, in Fedosseeva v. Gonzales, the court rejected a Latvian applicant’s asylum application deeming the fact that she was rendered stateless due to the fall of the Soviet Union irrelevant. 171 Therefore, they also have to meet the burden of demonstrating a well-founded fear of persecution on account of a protected ground in the country of their “last habitual residence” rather than in their country of nationality. 172 This can prove difficult given that many adjudicators do not understand the nature of their suffering as individuals without a nationality, and fail to grasp the nature of the harm that they have suffered or that they will likely suffer in the future. 173 Furthermore, the novelty of adjudicating asylum claims of stateless individuals can lead to prejudicial errors in findings of fact and law. 174 As a result, many do not qualify for asylum and are left without legal status. 175 And so they fall into a loophole in United States immigration law that treats the stateless as if they were in the country illegally and offers no clear way of adjudicating their claims to stay if their asylum claims are rejected. 176 166. Id.; see also U.N. High Comm’r for Refugees, Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status ¶¶ 89, 101–105 HCR/1P/4/enG/Rev. 3 (2011) [hereinafter UNHCR Handbook]. 167. UNHCR Handbook, supra note 166, ¶¶ 90, 102 at 19–20 168. Citizens of Nowhere, supra note 3, at 18. 169. Baluarte, supra note 20, at 366. 170. Citizens of Nowhere, supra note 3, at 18; see, e.g., Faddoul v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 37 F.3d 185 (5th Cir. 1994); Al Najjar v. Ashcroft, 257 F.3d 1262 (11th Cir. 2001); Fedosseeva v. Gonzales, 492 F.3d 840 (7th Cir. 2007); Pavlovich v. Gonzales, 476 F.3d 613 (8th Cir. 2007). 171. See Fedosseeva, 492 F.3d at 845. 172. Citizens of Nowhere, supra note 3, at 18. 173. Baluarte, supra note 20, at 366–67. 174. Id. at 366. 175. Id. at 353. 176. Dulai & Mendoza, supra note 3. 376