Images of asylum seekers and migrants desperate to enter the United States at the southern border abound in U.S. media. Less familiar to the American public, but intertwined with the highly politicized modern migration crisis, is the ever-growing backlog of pending asylum applications before both the Asylum Office and Immigration Courts. This backlog has many causes, including under-resourced agencies, a growing number of asylum applicants, the high evidentiary burden and complexities inherent to asylum law, and the lack of counsel for many asylum seekers. In response to this crippling backlog, some scholars propose the adoption of a “group-based” asylum mechanism. The U.S. government already uses group-based determinations in its refugee admissions program, as does UNHCR and other countries, to efficiently process large groups of refugees. Using a comparative approach, I examine group-based asylum mechanisms in the Organization of African Unity, several European Union member states, Canada, and Brazil. Analyzing these mechanisms, I identify criteria and possible procedures for the implementation of a U.S. group-based asylum mechanism to expedite certain asylum determinations. I explain that group-based asylum is a common-sense, cost-effective solution to modern challenges within asylum adjudication. The U.S. should learn from its peer countries and implement a group-based asylum mechanism to streamline adjudications in a time of increasing numbers of refugees around the globe. I propose administrative mechanisms for burden shifting that would lessen the evidentiary and procedural hurdles for asylum applicants falling within designated groups (“presumptive asylees”) to achieve the cost- and time-saving purpose of group-based asylum.
