Eric Supangat v. Eric H. Holder, Jr.
735 F.3d 792
| 8th Cir. | 2013Background
- Supangat, an Indonesian citizen, entered the United States on October 29, 2000 on an F-1 visa to attend Pacific Rim Language Institute.
- He stopped attending the school by December 31, 2000, rendering him removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(C)(i).
- On February 10, 2003, Supangat applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the CAT based on alleged persecution due to Chinese ethnicity and Christian religion in Indonesia.
- During the merits hearing, Supangat testified to harassment and a 1994 abduction threat in Indonesia, and to intimidation after starting a business in 1999.
- He testified that he did not report incidents to police because he believed authorities would not help due to Muslim-majority surroundings.
- The IJ found the asylum claim untimely and denied all relief; the BIA adopted the IJ’s reasons and denied Supangat’s appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether substantial evidence supports denial of asylum and withholding | Supangat argues aggregate harm and persecution | BIA found harm insufficiently severe or persecutory | Denial sustained; substantial evidence supports no asylum/withholding |
| Whether Supangat is entitled to CAT relief | Would likely be tortured if removed | Insufficient evidence of torture or government acquiescence | CAT relief denied |
| Whether the BIA properly relied on State Department reports for its determinations | Relies on evidence of persecution in Indonesia to support claim | State Department reports show tolerance and declining violence against Christians and ethnic Chinese | BIA properly supported its determinations with the reports |
Key Cases Cited
- Osonowo v. Mukasey, 521 F.3d 922 (8th Cir. 2008) (review of BIA/IJ where adopted reasoning combines both decisions)
- Tang v. INS, 223 F.3d 713 (8th Cir. 2000) (immigration law questions de novo on some issues)
- Perinpanathan v. INS, 310 F.3d 594 (8th Cir. 2002) (substantial-evidence standard for IJ factual findings)
- Turay v. Ashcroft, 405 F.3d 663 (8th Cir. 2005) (reversal requires compelling evidence not to find in petitioner’s favor)
- Wijono v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 868 (8th Cir. 2006) (minor beatings or detentions usually do not rise to persecution; State Dept. reports relevant)
- Setiadi v. Gonzales, 437 F.3d 710 (8th Cir. 2006) (detention and harassment insufficient without more specific persecution)
- Ngure v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 975 (8th Cir. 2004) (more likely than not standard for withholding of removal)
- Sow v. Mukasey, 546 F.3d 953 (8th Cir. 2008) (torture vs persecution claims not identical; CAT relief requires separate showing)