Abdifatah Gaas Qorane v. William Barr, U. S. Atty
919 F.3d 904
| 5th Cir. | 2019Background
- Qorane, a Somali national from the Ashraf minority clan, entered the U.S. without valid documents in 2016, conceded removability, and applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection.
- His claimed harms in Somalia included repeated verbal abuse and slapping by majority (Ayr) clan members, a shove from a donkey cart causing a minor hip injury after refusing to sell water on credit, and a death threat from that customer; he did not report incidents or seek medical care.
- He left Somalia in 2011, lived in Uganda and Angola, and did not attempt to come to the U.S. until late 2015.
- The IJ denied relief for past and future persecution and CAT protection; the BIA affirmed. Qorane’s multiple motions to reopen/reconsider and requests for stays were denied; he was removed to Somalia in 2018.
- He later sought review of the BIA’s denial of asylum/withholding/CAT and its refusal to reopen proceedings based on changed country conditions (including al-Shabaab activity). The Fifth Circuit denied the petition.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Past persecution for asylum/withholding | Qorane contends physical assault, threats, and clan-based harassment rose to persecution because he is Ashraf | Agency: incidents were minor (slaps, shove, a non-immediate threat) and not shown to be clan-motivated or severe enough | Denied — incidents not extreme enough to constitute persecution |
| Well-founded fear / future persecution | Qorane relies on the death threat and country conditions to show likelihood of future harm | Agency: no evidence the threat persisted or that Ayr or others would target him; country reports did not show Ashraf are currently targeted | Denied — no individualized targeting or pattern/practice shown |
| CAT relief (torture) | Qorane argues general country violence and militia authority make torture likely | Agency: generalized evidence insufficient; incidents don’t meet torture standard; no evidence of state acquiescence or public-official involvement | Denied — failed to show it is more likely than not he would be tortured or that private actors acted with government acquiescence |
| Motion to reopen — changed country conditions | Qorane submitted new evidence (affidavit on al-Shabaab and articles) arguing changed, worsening risks to Ashraf | Agency: evidence was either cumulative of prior civil strife evidence or not material to change outcome | Denied — evidence not material and would not likely change result |
| BIA sua sponte reopening jurisdiction | Qorane argues BIA should have reopened sua sponte | Government: BIA discretion to decline; decision committed to agency discretion | Court: No review — decision not subject to judicial review |
Key Cases Cited
- Roy v. Ashcroft, 389 F.3d 132 (5th Cir.) (per curiam) (standard for substantial-evidence review)
- Arif v. Mukasey, 509 F.3d 677 (5th Cir. 2007) (per curiam) (persecution is an "extreme" concept)
- Diallo v. U.S. Attorney Gen., 596 F.3d 1329 (11th Cir.) (per curiam) (credible, immediate death threat can constitute persecution in context)
- INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421 (1987) ("well-founded fear" standard and discussion of likelihood threshold for asylum)
- Efe v. Ashcroft, 293 F.3d 899 (5th Cir.) (CAT requires higher showing than persecution)
- Mata v. Lynch, 135 S. Ct. 2150 (2015) (BIA denial of reopening for changed conditions reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- Negusie v. Holder, 555 U.S. 511 (2009) (definition of torture and requirement of government involvement or acquiescence)
- D-Muhumed v. U.S. Attorney Gen., 388 F.3d 814 (11th Cir.) (private militia power-vacuum conduct does not equate to official government action)