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 Rejects Adverse Credibility Determination in Russian Asylum Claim
The court found that six of the seven bases given by the IJ for his adverse credibility determination were erroneous, and noted that the IJ’s decision contained misstatements of Petitioner’s testimony and flawed reasoning. (Pavlova v. INS, 3/14/06)
CA4 Holds IJ Erred in Requiring Proof that Political Persecution Was the Sole Motive of the Government
CA4 found that the IJ erred in requiring Petitioner to prove that political persecution was the Ethiopian government’s sole motive. The court held that the IJ, by failing to apply the “mixed motive” standard, erred as a matter of law. (Menghesha v. Gonzales, 3/13/06).
CA9 Reverses IJ’s Adverse Credibility Determination and Remands Sikh Asylum Case
The court held that the IJ’s adverse credibility finding was improper due to her failure to address explanations for a discrepancy, her reliance on inconsistencies that did not go to the heart of the asylum claim, and speculation. (Singh v. Gonzales, 3/10/06)
CA9 Vacates Motion to Reopen Denial Issued Before the End of the 90-Day Filing Period (Updated 4/10/06)
The court struck down the BIA’s summary denial of a skeletal motion to reopen, in which counsel indicated an intention to file a brief and additional documentation, before the end of the 90-day filing window. (Yeghiazaryanv v. Gonzales, 3/10/06)
EOIR's Automated Telephone Case Status Information System
EOIR notice discusses how to access the automated telephone case status information system.
CA7 Grants DOJ’s Motion to Remand Chinese Asylum Case
CA7 held that an agency may request a remand without confessing error to reconsider its previous opinion, noting that it has been critical of recent decisions by the BIA in asylum matters and that DOJ might want to have an opportunity to reconsider some decisions.(Ren v. Gonzales, 3/9/06)
CA7 Holds IJ Improperly Required Corroborating Evidence in Asylum Case
CA7 noted that an asylum claim of a credible applicant cannot be denied solely for lack of corroborating evidence. The court found that the IJ did not make an express credibility finding and never explained why it was reasonable to expect corroborating evidence.(Diallo v. Gonzales, 3/9/06)
CA8 Finds Asylum Applicant Waived His One-Year Deadline Due Process Claim and Failed to Establish a Pattern of Persecution in Indonesia
The court held that under the REAL ID Act it has jurisdiction to review constitutional and legal questions, but that Petitioner waived his due process claim based on the one-year deadline by not raising it with the BIA. (Wijono v. Gonzales, 3/8/06)
NSC Update on the Ngwanyia Lawsuit Email Address
NSC News Flash provides information about the email address for Ngwanyia lawsuit asylee adjustment cases, as affected by the NSC's recent change in e-mail system software.
AILA/TSC Meeting Minutes (3/6/06)
TSC responds to AILA liaison questions on fingerprints; biometrics; RFEs; PERM; Premium Processing; Schedule A; L-1; Conditional Permanent Resident; DOL Dallas Backlog Elimination Center; asylee adjustments; 245(i); divorce; H-1B; Forms I-485, I-797, N-400, I-824, I-129, I-130, I-140, I-751; etc.
Sign-On Letter to Senate Opposing Provisions in Chairman’s Mark That Would Harm Asylum Seekers
Letter signed by 84 organizations and 117 individuals and delivered to the Senate on 3/6/06, opposing provisions in the Chairman’s Mark that would harm “vulnerable populations, including asylum-seekers, children, trafficking victims, and others seeking protection in the United States.”
CA8 Upholds Decision that Catholic Indonesian Did Not Suffer Past Persecution and Does Not Have a Well-Founded Fear
The court held that past persecution does not normally include unfulfilled threats of physical injury. The court also found the IJ did not err with regard to his well-founded fear finding because the harm feared was not nationwide. (Setiadi v. Gonzales, 3/3/06)
CA6 Upholds “Frivolous” Determination by IJ and Finds Asylum Applicant Waived His Due Process Claim
The court held that the IJ’s adverse credibility finding was supported by substantial evidence. The court also found that Petitioner waived his due process claim. (Sterkaj v. Gonzales, 3/3/06)
CA2 Says Women Sold into Marriage in China Is a Social Group
The court found that women who have been sold into marriage and who live in a part of China where forced marriages are considered valid and enforceable is a particular social group for purposes of asylum. (Gao v. Gonzales, 3/3/06)
CA2 Discusses Subtle Inconsistencies and Credibility Determinations
In a case of first impression, the court held that where an inconsistency is not self-evident, an IJ may not rely on it without first bringing it to the attention of the applicant and giving the applicant the opportunity to explain. (Xue v. BIA, 2/21/06)
CA2 Says BIA Erred in Denying MTR, But Remand Would Be Futile
The court noted that the BIA erred in denying a motion to reopen by failing to assess whether country conditions had changed, but found that remand would be futile because the BIA addressed the error in denying the motion to reconsider. (Alam v. Gonzales, 2/17/06)
CA2 Upholds Denial of MTR in Chinese Family Planning Case
The court held that the BIA did not abuse its discretion because it considered and rejected evidence of changed country conditions, and further concluded that remand would be futile. (Wang v. BIA, 2/17/06)
CA9 Finds IJ’s Decision Supported by Substantial Evidence and Upholds Asylum Denial
The court affirmed the IJ’s decision that an ethnic Indian from Fiji did not suffer past persecution or have a well-founded fear. It found that the BIA's violation of its summary affirmance regulations by including a footnote was harmless error. (Kumar v. Gonzales, 2/15/06)
CA2 Upholds Adverse Credibility, Says Remand Would Be Futile
The court found that the IJ misstated evidence and erred in speculating that Petitioner was not a Sikh but still held that there were ample grounds to support adverse credibility and that remand would be futile. (Singh v. BIA, 2/14/06)
CA2 Rejects Untimely Motion to Reopen
The court held that Petitioner did not qualify for an exception for untimely motions because he did not show changed conditions in China and his ineffective assistance of counsel claim was raised 20 months after the BIA’s decision. (Chen v. Gonzales, 2/13/06)
CA2 Says IJ Must Inquire Into Fear of Sterilization as Basis for CAT
The court noted that neither it nor the BIA had determined whether forced sterilization amounts to torture and that it was error for the IJ to conclude that Article III of CAT was inapplicable where the IJ made no individual inquiry. (Ni v. BIA, 2/13/06)
CA1 Finds No Suspension Clause Violation in State-Created Danger CAT Case
Because the case presented only legal issues which the court can review under INA §242(a)(2)(D), the court concluded that “there is no possible claim that the REAL ID Act violates the Suspension Clause.” (Enwonwu v. Gonzales, 2/13/06)
CA1 Finds Changed Conditions in Kenya
The court found that the IJ reasonably rejected the inference that the new government in Kenya is dominated by Moi supporters, and that the notion that the new democratic government would repress the opposition was not compelling. (Waweru v. Gonzales, 2/13/06)
CA2 Upholds Denial of MTR in Ethnic Albanian Asylum Claim
The court held that the DOS report contained only general statements, but the BIA did not err in finding no well-founded fear. The court was troubled, however, by the BIA’s taking of administrative notice of improved conditions in Macedonia. (Adjin v. Gonzales, 2/9/06)
CA6 Upholds BIA’s Denial of Motion to Reopen but Finds BIA Erred about a Deadline Exception
The court held that the BIA erred in finding that Petitioner’s divorce was a change in circumstances that was an exception to the filing deadline. The court held that it did not constitute changed conditions in Jordan. (Haddad v. Gonzales, 2/9/06)