Government figures show more than 20 Americans have applied for asylum in New Zealand since 2020 - and at least one family was accepted.

Failed US appeals have centred on fears of gun crime, the environment and political climate.

Two American asylum claims of a brother and sister were successfully appealed, because of concerns their dual US/Jordan nationalities would lead them into harm.

Their Jordanian mother had been granted refugee status in New Zealand after she was repeatedly assaulted by her husband while living here, and treated as a servant by his extended family while living in Jordan.

She did not have US citizenship and so could not move there with her 11-year-old son and seven-year-old daughter. She and her husband had divorced, and she had custody of their children.

The tribunal ruled that if the pair were not given refugee status in New Zealand, the US was likely to send them back to Jordan where 'the children would be at risk of breach of their right to be free from cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment'.

"In Jordan, they fear being placed in the custody of their father's family and being mistreated by members of their paternal and maternal families," the tribunal said in its decision about the children.

"In the United States, they fear living as unaccompanied minors in institutional or foster care, and that they will be refouled [sent back] to live with family in Jordan."

Their mother had moved to New Zealand with her husband in 2011 when he was a student, saying she suffered intimate partner violence from the start, and was later abused by their families in Jordan.

"The mother was treated by her extended family like a servant and punished for not getting along with her husband. The [children] were treated cruelly by the mother's father, and the father's brothers hit and yelled at the son for any minor wrongdoing. The father's mother also encouraged the son to hit his sister and to censure her."

The family returned to New Zealand, but the violence continued, they were divorced and police were called after she was hospitalised by her injuries. The Family Court made an order barring the father from taking the children overseas.

"The mother also fears that her former husband's family will apply to the United States authorities for the children to return with them to Jordan and they will be exposed to ongoing violence in Jordan at their hands," said the children's 2023 appeal at the immigration and protection tribunal. "She fears, in particular, for her daughter, who will be raised in a climate of violence, and be conditioned to be a subordinate female accustomed to accepting violence."

Among unsuccessful US asylum bids was a woman who wanted protection from Covid-19, gun crime and her own government.

"The tribunal drew the appellant's attention to country information which indicated that while the USA is: politically and socially divided, has high rates of gun ownership, is suffering a rise in belligerent violent anti-government rhetoric, particularly on the far-right such that many people subjectively fear the country is heading towards civil war, the chance that a violent 'civil war' would erupt was remote and speculative."

Despite a significant number of Covid deaths and hospitalisations, "contrary to common parlance, there is in fact no recognised human right to be healthy", and the USA was complying with its obligations.

In another case, an American man claimed he risked persecution for expressing his anti-government views.

"The risk of the appellant being seriously harmed in the United States through environmental degradation, nuclear and toxic waste accidents, or gun-related violence is entirely remote and speculative and well below the 'real chance' threshold," it concluded.

"While the tribunal has no doubt the appellant is sincere in his beliefs and in his desire to live in New Zealand, a country to which he evidently feels a greater affinity than his native United States, the Refugee Convention is not designed to provide a pathway to residence for persons who feel morally and politically disassociated from the direction of their country."

A bisexual Jewish man afraid of returning to the US after president Donald Trump was first elected, also had his appeal dismissed on similar grounds.

A 1995 tribunal finding underpins some of the reasoning: "in the case of an advanced western democracy which generally respects the rule of law, such as the United States, there is a presumption of state protection" of citizens' rights, it said.

A 2008 appeal remarks that the-then Refugee Status Authority "has been unable to establish that there has ever been a successful claim for refugee status made in respect of a person being returned to [the US], either as a national or as a former habitual resident."

Many of the asylum claims cited fear of gun violence, while one man appeared to be fleeing justice.

"He claims that he will be immediately arrested on return to the United States, on the basis of a false criminal record and, owing to his profile, may be held in detention. He claims that he will not be able to seek redress from the US courts and may be repeatedly incarcerated and frustrated by [an unnamed State] District Attorney." He claimed risks to his personal security and freedom from threats made to him as a whistle-blower.

A 68-year-old woman believed Islamist terrorists had killed her relatives in America and had tried to kill her too, but was believed to be suffering from mental health problems. A 42-year-old man said he feared the extent of police violence, as he had been arrested for illegal camping during an Occupy protest, and had been criticised for his political beliefs.

Non-genuine asylum-seekers

Tribunal cases feature some asylum seekers who it decides genuinely fear for their safety or rights but do not meet criteria for asylum - for example, if the chance of someone being persecuted is remote.

However, migrants have also been accused of using the system to instead pursue the work rights that come with an asylum claim.

"While there are genuine claims, there are many claims - the vast majority of claims - that are not meritorious," immigration minister Erica Stanford said in March, as she pointed to high rejection rates of asylum claims.

"And in some instances, people lodge an asylum claim in the final days of another visa, not because they face persecution in their home country, but simply because they want to remain in New Zealand on that visa that everybody wants, the open work visa."

The Age in Australia reported on Sunday that 230 UK citizens in the last year had claimed asylum, with suggestions they were part of a trend of visa overstayers finding a legal loophole to stay and work in Australia.

In New Zealand, refugee claims are still dominated by people from India (683 last year) and China (336). Alongside the US, unusual source countries in the past three years include six Irish asylum seekers and five Japanese.

Seven British nationals have launched asylum appeals since 1997, and none were successful. The latest was last month, in which a non-binary Briton claimed that their Jamaican heritage and the Windrush scandal had led to their statelessness, detention and discrimination.