Court Opinion

ID: 9475006
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 05:14:37.035305+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:44:27.186714
License: Public Domain

RIPPLE, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
This case presents a very difficult issue of statutory interpretation. The court’s opinion is a thorough and balanced examination of the question which correctly represents, on the basis of all available evidence, the intent of Congress. I write separately only because I have substantial reservations about the court’s alternate treatment of the issue under the political question doctrine, a discussion which is unnecessary to the court’s basic statutory analysis.
In my view, this litigation does not present an appropriate opportunity to declare definitively that the matter of asylum is “committed to the political branches of government.” The full implications of such a statement are difficult to ascertain on this record. It is sufficient to say that the matter of political asylum, closely tied to the conduct of this country’s foreign relations, is an area where the political branches have traditionally exercised great discretion and where we would expect Congress to be quite explicit if it intended that the judiciary play a role.