IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlawss/v13y2024i4p53-d1455765.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Explaining Asylum Law Using Qualitative Comparative Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Philip Kretsedemas

    (Research, Evaluation and Data Analytics, Acacia Center for Justice, Washington, DC 20036, USA)

Abstract

This article demonstrates how Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) can be applied to the study of case law, with an emphasis on the granular analysis of jurisprudence. This article’s empirical focus is a study of asylum decisions issued by the US Circuit Courts. Prior research, using statistical methods, has observed disparities in asylum case outcomes that are partly explained by sociopolitical factors such as the partisan affiliation, gender, and home-state politics of the judiciary. This article uses QCA to revisit these findings; incorporating an analysis of jurisprudential criteria alongside the sociopolitical factors that have been identified by prior studies. All of the Circuit Court decisions for the cases included in the QCA analysis were issued during the first year of the Trump presidency; a time at which asylum-seekers at the US–Mexico border were becoming a focal point both for immigration enforcement and a polarized national debate over immigration policy. Despite the charged political context for these decisions, the QCA findings show that the two most decisive factors for Circuit Court decision-making on these cases were their rulings on nexus and patterns of decision-making that were specific to each court. The closing discussion cautions the reader against generalizing these findings to all appellate-level asylum decisions out of consideration for the epistemological orientation of QCA. Hence, the findings from this study should not be taken as conclusive evidence that sociopolitical factors are of little causal value for research on the appellate courts. Nevertheless, the findings do indicate that more attention should be paid to the explanatory power of jurisprudence. The concluding discussion also highlights the potential that QCA holds for building out a logic-based theory of legal decision making that can account for jurisprudence in tandem with sociopolitical factors and localized cultures of decision-making that help to explain disparate applications of the law.

Suggested Citation

  • Philip Kretsedemas, 2024. "Explaining Asylum Law Using Qualitative Comparative Analysis," Laws, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlawss:v:13:y:2024:i:4:p:53-:d:1455765
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/13/4/53/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/13/4/53/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guilherme Fowler A. Monteiro & Luciana Luk-Tai Yeung & Silvia Morales Q. Caleman & Leandro S. Pongeluppe, 2019. "Indigenous land demarcation conflicts in Brazil: Has the Supreme Court’s decision brought (in)stability?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 267-290, October.
    2. Hug, Simon, 2013. "Qualitative Comparative Analysis: How Inductive Use and Measurement Error Lead to Problematic Inference," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 252-265, April.
    3. Ragin, Charles C., 2000. "Fuzzy-Set Social Science," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226702773.
    4. repec:ucp:bkecon:9780226702766 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wise, Ramsey, 2015. "Does market-oriented education systems improve performance or increase inequality: A configurational comparative method for understanding (un)intended educational outcomes," TranState Working Papers 189, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    2. Martyna Daria Swiatczak, 2022. "Different algorithms, different models," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1913-1937, August.
    3. Alrik Thiem, 2022. "Beyond the Facts: Limited Empirical Diversity and Causal Inference in Qualitative Comparative Analysis," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 51(2), pages 527-540, May.
    4. Bear F. Braumoeller, 2017. "Aggregation Bias and the Analysis of Necessary and Sufficient Conditions in fsQCA," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 46(2), pages 242-251, March.
    5. Eva Thomann & Martino Maggetti, 2020. "Designing Research With Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA): Approaches, Challenges, and Tools," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 49(2), pages 356-386, May.
    6. Barbara Vis & Jan Dul, 2018. "Analyzing Relationships of Necessity Not Just in Kind But Also in Degree," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 47(4), pages 872-899, November.
    7. Wagemann, Claudius & Buche, Jonas & Siewert, Markus B., 2016. "QCA and business research: Work in progress or a consolidated agenda?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 2531-2540.
    8. Kamini Gupta & Donal Crilly & Thomas Greckhamer, 2020. "Stakeholder engagement strategies, national institutions, and firm performance: A configurational perspective," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(10), pages 1869-1900, October.
    9. Cheng, Cheng-Feng & Chang, Man-Ling & Li, Chu-Shiu, 2013. "Configural paths to successful product innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(12), pages 2561-2573.
    10. Markus Mayer & Markus Voeth, 2022. "Improving negotiation success in B2B sales organizations: is structured negotiation management a success factor?," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 92(2), pages 163-196, February.
    11. Mina Baliamoune-Lutz, 2004. "On the Measurement of Human Well-being: Fuzzy Set Theory and Sen's Capability Approach," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2004-16, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    12. Kusa, Rafał & Suder, Marcin & Duda, Joanna, 2023. "Impact of greening on performance in the hospitality industry: Moderating effect of flexibility and inter-organizational cooperation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    13. Gary Goertz & Tony Hak & Jan Dul, 2013. "Ceilings and Floors," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 42(1), pages 3-40, February.
    14. Skarmeas, Dionysis & Lisboa, Ana & Saridakis, Charalampos, 2016. "Export performance as a function of market learning capabilities and intrapreneurship: SEM and FsQCA findings," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 5342-5347.
    15. Arts, Bas & de Koning, Jessica, 2017. "Community Forest Management: An Assessment and Explanation of its Performance Through QCA," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 315-325.
    16. Grohs, Reinhard & Raies, Karine & Koll, Oliver & Mühlbacher, Hans, 2016. "One pie, many recipes: Alternative paths to high brand strength," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 2244-2251.
    17. Jantunen, Ari & Tarkiainen, Anssi & Chari, Simos & Oghazi, Pejvak, 2018. "Dynamic capabilities, operational changes, and performance outcomes in the media industry," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 251-257.
    18. Barry Cooper & Judith Glaesser, 2016. "Analysing necessity and sufficiency with Qualitative Comparative Analysis: how do results vary as case weights change?," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 327-346, January.
    19. Gustav Lidén, 2013. "What about theory? The consequences on a widened perspective of social theory," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 213-225, January.
    20. Wang, Huanming & Ran, Bing, 2022. "How business-related governance strategies impact paths towards the formation of global cities? An institutional embeddedness perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlawss:v:13:y:2024:i:4:p:53-:d:1455765. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.