{"pk":65663,"title":"The Failure to Recognize Climate Refugees: Domestic Law vs. International Reality   ","subtitle":null,"abstract":"<p>Climate change drives human displacement, yet international and domestic refugee law fail to recognize environmentally-led migration. Under the Refugee Act of 1980, United States (U.S.) law limits persecution to five statutory grounds, excluding climate-induced harm. The absence of legal eligibility under existing frameworks results in a protection gap, leaving displaced individuals without access to refugee status despite threats from environmental degradation. The United Nations has examined this disconnect between international reality and domestic action in cases such as <em>Teitiota v. New Zealand</em> (2020), where asylum was denied on the grounds of sea-level rise and saltwater contamination being a threat to life. This highlights the narrow interpretation of “persecution” and its failure to account for modern forms of forced migration. A recent U.S. Appellate Court decision in <em>Cruz Galicia v. Garland</em> (2024) reinforced the exclusion of climate-refugee claims from U.S. refugee frameworks. Evaluating the shortcomings of the Refugee Act of 1980 emphasizes how outdated U.S. refugee laws are concerning modern displacement factors. This paper proposes an amendment to the Refugee Act of 1980, expanding “persecution” to include climate change and environmental harm, and establishing a flexible annual refugee ceiling that allocates a percentage of admissions for climate refugees. By modernizing refugee law, the U.S. ensures protection for vulnerable populations and influences the evolution of global refugee norms. </p>","language":"eng","license":{"name":"Creative Commons Attribution 4.0","short_name":"CC BY 4.0","text":"Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.\r\n\r\nNo additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0"},"keywords":[{"word":"Teitiota v. New Zealand"},{"word":"Cruz Galicia v. Garland"},{"word":"human displacement"},{"word":"climate change"},{"word":"climate refugees"},{"word":"Refugee Act of 1980"},{"word":"UN"},{"word":"ICJ"}],"section":"Article","is_remote":true,"remote_url":"https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2h51z7tj","frozenauthors":[{"first_name":"Angie","middle_name":"","last_name":"Lopez","name_suffix":"","institution":"UC San Diego","department":""}],"date_submitted":"2026-05-12T01:14:48.347647Z","date_accepted":"2026-05-13T01:54:58.452589Z","date_published":"2026-05-13T15:00:00Z","render_galley":null,"galleys":[{"label":"PDF","type":"pdf","path":"https://journalpub.escholarship.org/ucsdulr/article/65663/galley/50321/download/"}]}