In 2018, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, in Matter of A-B-, attempted to bar victims of non-state actors—such as intimate partners and local gangs—from obtaining asylum in the United States. This article focuses on domestic violence-based asylum claims that made it to the US Circuit Court of Appeals during the Trump administration and the first five months of the Biden administration. My interdisciplinary approach goes beyond analysing the effect that Matter of A-B- has had on the outcomes of cases and asks how judges evaluate the credibility of petitioners, determine whether domestic violence can rise to the level of persecution, and decide whether a government was unwilling or unable to protect the victim. A systematic analysis of 83 appellate level verdicts shows that asylum decisions are fraught with inconsistencies and that many judges lack a sophisticated understanding of domestic violence, credibility, and trauma.

2018 年，司法部长 Jeff Sessions 在AB- 案中试图禁止非国家行为者的受害者（例如亲密伴侣和当地帮派）在美国获得庇护。本文重点关注在特朗普政府和拜登政府头五个月期间向美国巡回上诉法院提出的基于家庭暴力的庇护申请。我的跨学科方法超越了分析AB-的影响已经对案件的结果产生了影响，并询问法官如何评估上访者的可信度，确定家庭暴力是否会上升到迫害的程度，以及政府是否不愿意或无法保护受害者。对 83 个上诉级别判决的系统分析表明，庇护决定充满矛盾，许多法官对家庭暴力、可信度和创伤缺乏深入的了解。