Asghar v. Sessions
708 F. App'x 34
| 2d Cir. | 2018Background
- Petitioner Ali Asghar, a Pakistani national, applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief based on persecution surrounding his father’s murder and alleged membership in Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan.
- Asghar filed his asylum application in 2003; the REAL ID Act does not apply.
- An Immigration Judge denied relief in April 2014, finding Asghar not credible; the BIA affirmed in August 2016 (except for an IJ finding on asylum timeliness and a Taliban fear claim Asghar abandoned).
- The adverse credibility finding rested on inconsistencies about (1) whether Asghar was a member of Sipah-e-Sahaba, (2) whether he shot his father’s alleged murderer, and (3) whether he reported the events to police.
- The agency concluded the inconsistencies were material to the core of Asghar’s claim and dispositive of asylum, withholding, and CAT relief because all claims shared the same factual predicate.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether IJ/BIA reasonably found Asghar not credible | Asghar contended his testimony was truthful and any discrepancies were explainable | Government argued there were material, unexplained inconsistencies undermining credibility | Court held the agency reasonably found him not credible based on specific inconsistencies |
| Whether adverse credibility ruling met pre-REAL ID Act standard | Asghar argued discrepancies were not substantial when viewed against whole record | Government maintained adverse credibility was supported by specific, cogent reasons bearing nexus to the finding | Court applied pre-REAL ID Act standard and found the agency’s reasons adequate |
| Whether withholding of removal and CAT relief survive adverse credibility finding | Asghar argued relief should still be granted on the record | Government argued all claims rest on same factual predicate and fail if credibility rejected | Court held those claims fail because they depend on the same discredited facts |
| Applicability of REAL ID Act standards | Asghar argued pre-REAL ID standard applied (filed in 2003) | Government did not dispute applicability of pre-REAL ID standard | Court confirmed REAL ID Act does not apply and used pre-REAL ID standards |
Key Cases Cited
- Secaida-Rosales v. INS, 331 F.3d 297 (2d Cir. 2003) (pre-REAL ID credibility standard requiring specific, cogent reasons and substantial discrepancies measured against whole record)
- Xue Hong Yang v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 426 F.3d 520 (2d Cir. 2005) (reviewing BIA decisions as modified)
- Tu Lin v. Gonzales, 446 F.3d 395 (2d Cir. 2006) (adverse credibility determinations may be based on inconsistent statements)
- Majidi v. Gonzales, 430 F.3d 77 (2d Cir. 2005) (applicant must offer compelling explanation for inconsistencies)
- Paul v. Gonzales, 444 F.3d 148 (2d Cir. 2006) (withholding and CAT relief fail when based on same discredited factual predicate)
- Liang Chen v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 454 F.3d 103 (2d Cir. 2006) (REAL ID Act inapplicable to asylum applications filed before its enactment)
- Xiu Xia Lin v. Mukasey, 534 F.3d 162 (2d Cir. 2008) (discussing standards governing credibility and review)