Physical resistance not necessary to prove force for asylum purposes
In Tang v. Gonzales, the Ninth Circuit granted a petition for review of a denial of a grant of asylum. Tang had sought asylum from China due to the forced termination of his common law wife’s pregnancy. Forced abortion results in a statutory entitlement of asylum for the woman and her partner. Tang presented evidence that his wife was required to submit to a gynecological examination by her employer, was found to be pregnant, was physically taken by the employer to the medical facility, and suffered an abortion performed without anesthesia. The Court rejected the immigration judge’s (IJ) findings that the abortion had not been forced Tang and his wife had not protested, physically resisted, or attempted to go into hiding. The Court relied upon the facts that the examination had been mandatory, the employer required the abortion, the employer physically took the wife to the facility, and the abortion was performed without anesthesia to find force was established.
