You’re saying: This statute provides us with legal basis to refuse refugee status because WE are able to deny people based on a religious test provided in the text of the law you quoted. If I am misreading what you’re saying, stop here and correct me.
I am saying the various parts of this law describe who is eligible to claim refugee status and that where religion is mentioned, it’s mentioned as one of the types of persecution for which a person can validly request that status.
With that said, here’s my interpretation of each part of what you quoted:
(42)A person can claim to be a refugee if they are/will be.....
A) persecuted on count of race, religion, nationality etc..
B) persecuted based on race, religion, nationality etc...Where special circumstances exist that the President (after following section 1157(e)) determines
The term refugee does not apply to anyone involved in the persecution of people based on race, religion, nationality etc...
A refugee can also be someone who’s undergone forced abortion or sterilization as a result of political opinion.
Please tell me how I’m misreading this.
I essentially agree with your analysis of it, I am just saying that the claim no religious litmus test has ever existed is bogus based on a clear reading of the laws on the books and paying attention to past history. If someone claims that they are being persecuted based on their religion, then you have to verify they are of said religion and determine if the request for refugee status is legitimate (ultimately a religious litmus test). At least you would have to do this if you are legitimately performing the job function described in the codified law.