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 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)
CA8 Upholds IJ’s Adverse Credibility Determination in Togolese Asylum Case
The court concluded that the IJ’s adverse credibility determination was supported by substantial evidence, including Petitioner’s lack of prominence in the opposition party and his claim that he ran his business while in hiding. (Mamana v. Gonzales, 2/8/06)
U.S. Contribution to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
DOS news release about the U.S. fiscal contribution to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).
CA2 Rejects "Safe Haven" Finding
The court overturned the IJ’s safe haven finding where it was issued three days after the repeal of the regulation that allowed for a discretionary denial on that basis. (Tandia v. Gonzales, 2/7/06)
CA9 Overturns IJ’s Negative Credibility Determination of Asylum Applicant Who Smuggled Falun Gong Material into China
The court held that the IJ did not identify a specific, cogent reason to support his incredibility finding, but instead relied on speculation and conjecture about Petitioner’s position in Chinese society and what someone in her position would do. (Zhou v. Gonzales, 2/7/06)
CA2 Adopts “Totality of the Circumstances” Test for Firm Resettlement
The court adopted a totality of the circumstances test and concluded that the IJ’s finding of firm resettlement was not supported by substantial evidence. (Sall v. Gonzales, 2/3/06)
Letter to President Bush Regarding Cuban Refugees
Sign-on letter to President Bush by refugee and human rights organizations, including AILA, decrying treatment of Cubans reaching Florida Keys and other U.S. land who are repatriated without being granted “credible fear” interviews.
CA2 Says IJ Erred, But Upholds Negative Credibility Finding
The court held that the IJ erred in finding that Petitioner’s testimony lacked detail, but nonetheless concluded that the IJ’s denial of asylum was supported by substantial evidence. (Qyteza v. Gonzales, 2/2/06)
CA2 Finds Jurisdiction to Review Timeliness of Asylum Application
The court found that it had jurisdiction to review whether any rational trier of fact would be compelled to conclude that Petitioner provided clear and convincing evidence that he timely filed his asylum application. (Liu v. Gonzales, 1/30/06)
CA8 Finds Agency Erred by Not Placing Burden on Gov’t in Asylum Termination
The court found that the IJ and BIA erred in placing the burden on Petitioner to prove her asylum eligibility anew. The court held that the regulation requires the government to prove fraud by a preponderance of the evidence.(Ntangsi v. Gonzales, 1/30/06)
CA1 Upholds Denial of Motion to Reopen in Chinese Family Planning Case
The court held that the BIA properly denied Petitioner’s motion to reopen where the motion did not include new evidence and where Petitioner’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel did not meet the Lozada requirements. (Zeng v. Gonzales, 1/27/06)
NSC Teleconference Q & A's on Asylee and Refugee Product Line (1-26-06)
NSC Teleconference Q&As (1-26-06) include: I-693, supplemental medical exam, I-730, CDC, I-130, waivers, NVC, I-485, DNA testing, NOID, RFE, fingerprints, biometrics, Class B condition, Class A waiver, HIV, G-325, AR-11, I-94, I-551, I-590, cases transferred to TSC, expedites, RTD, and I-131.
CA2 Finds IJ Abused His Discretion in Denying Asylum in Forced Sterilization Case
The court held that the IJ abused his discretion by not considering the totality of the circumstances, relying instead on findings that part of Petitioner’s story was false and that he had used a smuggler. (Huang v. INS, 1/25/06)
CA7 Overturns Adverse Credibility Finding of Albanian Asylum Applicant
The court held that the IJ erred in finding Petitioner’s testimony was implausible, inconsistent with a DOS country profile and inconsistent with other evidence.(Shtaro v. Gonzales, 1/24/06)
CA6 Heightens the Prejudice Showing Required to Prevail on Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Claims Based on Prior Counsel’s Failure to Seek Judicial
The court held that “the lost opportunity to appeal an adverse decision in a removal proceeding, because of ineffective assistance of counsel, cannot form the basis of a due process claim unless the appeal itself would have succeeded.” (Sako v. Gonzales, 1/20/06)
CA7 Finds Petitioner Eligible for Asylum Based on his Remarried Wife’s Forced Abortion
The court held that the IJ violated the “rule of the case” doctrine by making new adverse credibility determinations, and that Petitioner was eligible for asylum based on his wife’s forced abortion, despite her remarriage.(Zhang v. Gonzales, 1/19/06)
CA2 Discusses One-Year Asylum Deadline and “Last Arrival"
The court found Petitioner's asylum application untimely and concluded that the term "last arrival in the United States" should not include return on parole after a brief trip abroad. (Joaquin-Porras v. Gonzales, 1/18/06)