Edu v. Holder, 624 F.3d 1137

Edu, a Nigerian citizen and Ijaw status, entered the United States in 1989 and became a lawful permanent resident in 1993 after marrying a U.S. citizen.
She was convicted of an aggravated felony in California and conceded removability but pursued deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture (CAT).
Edu participated in the Ijaw Youth Association in the 1980s, engaging in protests to address regional and minority grievances in Nigeria’s Niger Delta.
She testified to multiple police/military abuses including detention, rape, beatings, and imprisonment linked to her political activities; she remained fearful of return.
An Immigration Judge granted CAT deferral in 2002; the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denied relief and ordered removal, leading to further review before this court.
The court remanded with instructions to consider deferral and later addressed Edu’s separate claim of female genital mutilation (FGM) as a basis for CAT relief.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the BIA erred by requiring Edu to cease political activity to avoid torture	Edu argues CAT protects political expression and cannot force relinquishment of conscience-driven activity.	Edu relies on BIA’s view that avoidance of torture can be accomplished by refraining from political activity; BIA claims no protection for voluntary behavior.	Edu entitled to relief; CAT does not require abandoning political beliefs to avoid torture.
Whether relocation within Nigeria could reasonably reduce Edu's risk of torture	Edu contends relocation is not a viable, safe option given widespread political oppression.	BIA suggested movement to another part of the country could reduce risk.	Relocation cannot save her where widespread persecution exists; this factor does not support denial of CAT relief.
Whether Edu’s FGM claim should be addressed as a separate basis for CAT relief on remand	FGM constitutes an additional independent risk basis that warrants CAT protection if proven.	BIA should consider the FGM claim on remand; separate basis requires adjudication.	Remand for consideration of the FGM-based CAT claim; CAT deferral affirmed for the political activity basis.

Nuru v. Gonzales, 404 F.3d 1207 (9th Cir. 2005) (past torture elevates risk analysis under CAT)
Zhang v. Ashcroft, 388 F.3d 713 (9th Cir. 2004) (CAT protection cannot be limited to political conformism; protect conscience-driven activists)
INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478 (1992) (ultimate standard for persecution proof in asylum context)
Aguirre-Aguirre v. INS, 526 U.S. 415 (1999) (Chevron deference framework in agency interpretations)
Skidmore v. Swift & Co., 323 U.S. 134 (1944) (non-precendential persuasive value; factors for weight)
Mead Corp. v. United States, 533 U.S. 218 (2001) (precedes weight of agency interpretation under Skidmore)
Kamalthas v. INS, 251 F.3d 1279 (9th Cir. 2001) (statutory or regulatory construction considerations in CAT context)