On May 8, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board), in a case where the respondent was pro se, and supplemental briefs were received from DHS and amici… CONTINUE
For Purposes Of Determining Whether A Respondent Is Subject To The Firm Resettlement Bar To Asylum, A Viable And Available Offer To Apply For Permanent Residence In A Country Of Refuge Is Not Negated By One’s Unwillingness Or Reluctance To Satisfy The Terms For Acceptance.
On April 10, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) dismissed the appeal of a Haitian citizen whose applications for asylum and withholding of removal had been denied… CONTINUE
BIA Holds That Immigration Judge Properly Determined That Respondent Was A Flight Risk And Denied His Request For A Custody Redetermination Where, Although His Asylum Application Was Pending, He Had No Family, Employment Or Community Ties And No Probable Path To Obtain Lawful Status So As To Warrant His Release On Bond.
On March 18, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) dismissed Respondent’s appeal of the Immigration Judge (IJ’s) denial of his request to be released on bond. Respondent,… CONTINUE
BIA Holds That An Interpol Red Notice May Constitute Reliable Evidence Indicating That The Serious Nonpolitical Crime Bar To Asylum And Withholding Of Removal Applies To An Applicant. Here, Respondent’s Violation Of Article 345 Of The Salvadoran Penal Code, Which Procribes Participation In An Illicit Organization Whose Purpose Is The Commission Of Crimes, Was “Serious” Within The Meaning Of The Nonpolitical Crime Bar.
On March 6, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) dismissed the appeal of an applicant whose requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention… CONTINUE
Attorney General Holds That BIA Should Consider De Novo The Application Of Law To The Facts Of This Case, Including Whether The Deprivation That Respondent Would Be Likely To Encounter Upon Removal To Mexico Would Constitute “Torture” Within The Meaning Of The Department Of Justice Regulations Implementing The Convention Against Torture (CAT). To Constitute “Torture” Under These Regulations, An Act Must, Among Other Things, Be Specifically Intended To Inflict Severe Physical Or Mental Pain Or Suffering. 8 C.F.R. §1208.18(a)(5). Additionally, Torture Does Not Cover Negligent Acts Or Harm Stemming From A Lack Of Resources. To Constitute “Torture”, An Act Must Also Be Motivated By Such Purposes As Obtaining From Him Or Her Or A Third Person Information Or A Confession, Punishing Him Or Her For An Act He Or She Or A Third Person Has Committed Or Is Suspected Of Having Committed, Or Intimidating Or Coercing Him Or Her Or A Third Person, Or For Any Reason Based On Discrimination Of Any Kind.
On February 26, 2020, U.S. Attorney General (AG) William Barr directed the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) to refer the instant case to him for review of its… CONTINUE
BIA Holds That An Asylum Applicant’s Status As A Landowner Does Not Automatically Render Him Or Her A Member Of A Particular Social Group For Purposes Of Asylum And Withholding Of Removal. To Establish A Particular Social Group Based On Landownership, One Must Demonstrate By Evidence In The Record That Members Of The Proposed Group Share An Immutable Characteristic And That The Group Is Defined With Particularity And Is Perceived To Be Socially District In The Society In Question. The Respondent’s Proposed Particular Social Groups – Comprised Of Landowners And Landowners Who Resist Drug Cartels In Guatemala – Are Not Valid Based On The Evidence Of Record.
On February 10, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) dismissed the appeal of a Guatemalan native whose applications for asylum, withholding of removal and CAT relief were… CONTINUE
BIA Holds That Where DHS Returns An Applicant To Mexico To Await An Immigration Hearing Pursuant To The Migrant Protection Protocols And Provides Him Or Her With Sufficient Notice Of The Hearing, An Immigration Judge Should Enter An In Absentia Order Of Removal If The Applicant Fails To Appear.
On January 31, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) sustained a DHS appeal, reinstated removal proceedings, and remanded the record for further proceedings. Respondent had applied for… CONTINUE
BIA Holds That, In Assessing Whether To Grant An Applicant’s Request For A Continuance Regarding AN Application For Collateral Relief, The Applicant’s Prima Facie Eligibility For Relief And Whether It Will Materially Affect The Outcome Of Proceedings Are Not Dispositive, Especially Where Other Factors – Including The Uncertainty As To When The Relief Will Be Approved Or Become Available – Weigh Against Granting A Continuance.
On January 22, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) dismissed the appeal and denied the motion to remand of Respondent, who had been convicted of attempted possession… CONTINUE
BIA Holds That A Notice To Appear That Does Not Include The Address Of The Immigration Court Where DHS Will File The Charging Document, Or A Certificate Of Service Indicating The Immigration Court In Which The Charging Document Is Filed, Does Not Deprive The Immigration Court Of Subject Matter Jurisdiction.
On January 9, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) sustained the DHS appeal of an order by an Immigration Judge (IJ) terminating removal proceedings based on defective… CONTINUE
BIA Holds That The Offense Of Making Terroristic Threats In Violation Of Section 609.713, Subdivision 1, Of The Minnesota Statutes Is Categorically A Crime Involving Moral Turpitude
On January 2, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) sustained a DHS appeal and remanded the record to the Immigration Judge (IJ), who had found Respondent removable… CONTINUE
- 1
- 2
- 3
- …
- 25
- Next Page »