Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have a right to do and what is right to do.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+

Legal Definitions - INS v. Elias-Zacarias

LSDefine

You win some, you lose some, and some you just bill by the hour.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+

Definition of INS v. Elias-Zacarias

INS v. Elias-Zacarias is a legal case in which the Supreme Court of the United States decided that a guerrilla organization's attempt to force someone into military service does not necessarily qualify as persecution on account of political opinion under the Immigration and Nationality Act. The Court also established that when determining whether there is persecution on account of political opinion, the court must ascertain the victim's political opinion, not the persecutor's.

For example, in this case, the respondent, Elias-Zacarias, had only been approached by a guerrilla organization once in his home and threatened to join. He did not want to join and was afraid of retaliation, so he fled Guatemala and entered the United States, where he applied for asylum. The Court found that he failed to show that he refused to join because of a political motive. Thus, the focus of the inquiry should be on Respondent's political motive and not the political motive of the persecutors.

The Court also established that a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals can only be reversed if the evidence presented by the applicant is such that a reasonable fact-finder would conclude that the requisite fear of persecution exists. This means that the applicant must show that there is a "reasonable possibility" that they would be persecuted on account of their political opinion.

Make crime pay. Become a lawyer.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+

Simple Definition

In INS v. Elias-Zacarias, the Supreme Court decided that being forced to join a military group does not always count as persecutionbased on political opinion. They also said that when deciding if someone is being persecuted for their political opinion, you have to look at the victim's opinion, not the persecutor's. Finally, they said that the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision can only be changed if the applicant's evidence shows that there is a reasonable fear of persecution. The case was about a man who fled Guatemala because he was afraid of being forced to join a guerrilla group. The Court decided that he did not show enough evidence that he was being persecuted for his political opinion.

It's every lawyer's dream to help shape the law, not just react to it.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+

Law school: Where you spend three years learning to think like a lawyer, then a lifetime trying to think like a human again.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+