CA1 Finds BIA Improperly Disregarded Evidence of Changed Country Conditions in Indonesia in Petitioners’ Motion to Reopen

The court first held that the BIA correctly disposed of the petitioners’ procedurally improper motion to amend and the substantively deficient motion to reconsider, and thus denied in part the petition for review and affirmed the denials of the motions to reconsider and amend. However, the court concluded that, in reviewing the motion to reopen, the BIA discarded evidence—without considering its merits—on legally unjustifiable bases, where the petitioners had submitted new evidence based on changed country conditions related to acts of violence directed at Christian Indonesians. The court noted that while the BIA retains wide latitude to weigh such evidence, it may not ignore it. Accordingly, the court granted in part the petition for review, vacated the denial of the motion to reopen, and remanded. (Tulung v. Garland, 5/21/24)