Featured Issue: Asylum Under Trump 2.0
On the first day of his second term, President Trump suspended all entries at the U.S. Southern Border for asylum seekers. Since then, the Administration has implemented sweeping restrictions that shut America’s doors to people fleeing persecution. These policies violate federal law, erode constitutionally protected due process, exacerbate the asylum backlog, and give those seeking safety an increasingly narrow path to protection.
Left unchecked by Congress, these policies will have dire consequences for both asylum seekers and the integrity of our legal system. Asylum seekers—especially those without access to counsel—are at grave risk of being returned to harm.
It doesn’t have to be this way. The Administration can maintain order at U.S. borders and effectively manage migration without sacrificing fairness and adherence to the law. With more trained asylum officers, a streamlined legal process, legal representation for asylum seekers, and more effective coordination between relevant agencies, the U.S. can establish a safe, orderly, and humane asylum system.
Browse the Featured Issue: Asylum Under Trump 2.0 collection
CA2 Overturns Adverse Credibility Finding in Forced Sterilization Case
The court held that the IJ’s finding that Petitioner failed to testify about his wife’s sterilization at his first asylum hearing did not support the IJ’s adverse credibility determination. (Kim v. Gonzales, 7/19/06)
CA3 Finds Gay Argentine Suffered Past Persecution by Police
The court found that the treatment Petitioner suffered at the hands of the police, which occurred at least 20 times over several years, was persecution, even though he did not suffer severe injuries nor was he ever detained more than 12 hours. (Maldonado v. Atty. Gen. of U.S., 7/18/06)
CA3 Discusses “Particularly Serious Crime” Bar to Withholding of Removal
The court held that an offense must be an aggravated felony in order to be classified as a particularly serious crime and that the IJ erred in failing to consider only the loss attached to the fraud count for which Petitioner was convicted. (Alaka v. Att’y Gen. of the U.S., 7/18/06)
CA2 Finds Record Shows Worsening Conditions in Belarus
The court held that the IJ and BIA erred in overlooking evidence that conditions in Belarus deteriorated between 1996 and 2000 and remanded the withholding claim. (Serafimovich v. Ashcroft, 7/17/06)
CA6 Finds Limited Jurisdiction to Review Denial of Time-Barred Asylum
The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to review the denial of a time-barred asylum application unless a constitutional claim or question of law is raised in accordance with INA §242(a)(2)(D). (Almuhtaseb v. Gonzales, 07/14/06)
CA7 Relies on DOS Profile on Abortion Certificates to Uphold Asylum Denial
Although CA7 found errors in the adverse credibility determination, it held that the IJ based his finding on one ground sufficient to support the ruling: the DOS Profile showing that the Chinese government does not issue certificates for involuntary abortions. (Huang v. Gonzales, 7/14/06)
CA9 Finds Eritrean Jehovah’s Witness Lacked Past Harm or Well-Founded Fear
The court upheld the IJ’s finding that Petitioner failed to establish past persecution or a well-founded fear. The dissent argued that discriminatory treatment based on the religion of those who refuse conscription is persecution based on a protected ground. (Zehatye v. Gonzales, 7/13/06)
BIA Affirms Asylum for Former Child Soldier
In an unpublished decision, the BIA affirmed the IJ’s decision to grant asylum, noting the respondent established a well-founded fear of persecution based on his Acholi tribal membership, as well as the possibility he could be identified as a former child soldier.
CA2 Remands for BIA to Develop Standards on “Frivolousness”
The court found that substantial evidence supported the negative credibility finding but remanded the IJ’s finding of frivolousness and asked the BIA to formulate standards for deciding when an asylum seeker’s application is frivolous. (Liu v. DOJ, 7/11/06)
CA7 Recommends Agency Hire Country Experts for Asylum Cases
The court remanded a Liberian asylum claim, noting that an IJ is not an expert on conditions in any given country, and a priori views are no substitute for evidence. The court recommended that the agency have an expert for each country. (Banks v. Gonzales, 7/5/06)
CA2 Reverses IJ’s Fake Document Finding in Chinese Asylum Claim
The court held that the IJ engaged in speculation and made improper inferences in concluding that Petitioner’s 1989 and 1998 marriage certificates were fake. (Li v. INS, 6/29/06)
CA2 Remands Chinese Asylum Claim Due to IJ Bias and Hostility
The court found that apart from flaws in the adverse credibility finding, remand was required because of the IJ’s hostility, noting that the IJ’s questioning was inappropriate and indicated a bias toward Chinese witnesses. (Huang v. Gonzales, 6/29/06)
CA11 Holds BIA Abused its Discretion in Summarily Dismissing Appeal
The court held that where the notice of appeal sets forth its basis, the BIA erred in summarily dismissing it solely because Petitioners indicated that they would file a supporting brief, but failed to do so or offer an explanation for not doing so. (Esponda v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 6/28/06)
CA2 Remands Where BIA Granted Relief to Spouse on Same Facts
The court remanded to ensure that the denial of the wife's claim was not arbitrary in light of its grant of relief to the husband, where husband and wife feared persecution based on the birth of two children in the U.S. (Zhang v. Gonzales, 6/21/06)
DOS Remarks Regarding U.S. Commitment to Refugee Protection and Assistance
In remarks to the Heritage Foundation, Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration Ellen R. Sauerbrey discussed the U.S. commitment to refugee protection and assistance.
USCIS Responds to Ombudsman Proposal to Change Affirmative Asylum Process
Memorandum from Dr. Emilio Gonzalez, Director, USCIS, responding to and rejecting recommendations of the CIS Ombudsman to severely change the affirmative asylum process.
CA2 Resolves Timing Issue for MTRs Based on Changed Conditions
The court held that for purposes of a motion to reopen based on changed country conditions, the date the record was closed by the IJ is the date prior to which any evidence must be unavailable. (Norani v. Gonzales, 6/16/06)
CA7 Holds IJ’s Refusal to Continue Hearing Resulted in Denial of Due Process
CA7 held that the hearing on the merits was fundamentally unfair in light of the improper withdrawal of Petitioner’s attorney, the attorney’s retention of Petitioner’s documents, and the IJ’s refusal to continue Petitioner’s hearing. (Gjeci v. Gonzales, 6/15/06)
BIA Finds Social Visibility Important in Determining Whether a Particular Social Group Exist
The BIA held that social visibility of a claimed social group is important in identifying if a “particular social group” exists and that a group of former drug informants working against the Cali cartel did not have the requisite social visibility. Matter of C-A-, 23 I&N Dec. 951 (BIA 2006)
Sign-on Letter Opposing Proposal to Unravel Affirmative Asylum Process
Letter from 58 organizations to USCIS opposing a proposal submitted by the CIS Ombudsman that would limit the filing of asylum applications with USCIS to persons in nonimmigrant status, charge a fee for asylum applications, and shift authority for credible fear assessments to ICE.
CA11 Holds Five-Day Detention of Falun Gong Member Not Persecution
The court found that although under certain circumstances detention may rise to the level of persecution, Petitioner’s 5-day detention during which he was unharmed did not compel the conclusion that Petitioner suffered past persecution. (Zheng v. U.S. Atty. Gen., 6/14/06)
CA4 Discusses Delivery Presumptions for Notices to Appear
The court held that for purposes of rescinding an in absentia removal order, where a notice to appear is sent by regular mail, the BIA abused its discretion by requiring Petitioner to rebut the “strong presumption” of delivery for certified mail. (Nibagwire v. Gonzales, 6/13/06)
CA5 Holds AG’s Heightened Standard of Review for §209(c) Waivers Is Not Ultra Vires
The court held that the AG’s imposition of a heightened standard of review to §209(c) waivers of inadmissibility that are sought by “violent criminals” was within the scope of his discretion as conferred by the INA and therefore, not ultra vires. (Jean v. Gonzales, 6/9/06)
CA7 Finds IJ Erred in Not Allowing Testimony of 3 Witnesses in Asylum Case
Because the IJ continued the case to a day on which he knew that Petitioner’s witnesses would be unavailable, the IJ denied Petitioner the opportunity to present corroborating evidence and refused to “receive and consider material and relevant evidence."(Boyanivskyy v. Gonzales, 6/9/06)
CA9 En Banc Panel Finds IJ Lacked Sufficient Evidence on Firm Resettlement
CA9 reheard the case to determine what evidence DHS must produce to meet its burden of showing the firm resettlement bar applies. It held that DHS must first show the applicant had an offer of official status permitting him to remain in a country indefinitely. (Maharaj v. Gonzales, 6/9/06)