Haile v. Holder
658 F.3d 1122
| 9th Cir. | 2011Background
- Haile, Eritrean citizen, entered the U.S. on a tourist visa in 1999 and overstayed.
- She testified she joined the Eritrean Liberation Front (ELF) in 1977 and aided its activities with funds, provisions, and information.
- The IJ found the ELF to be a terrorist organization and Haile to have engaged in terrorist activities, barring relief.
- The BIA affirmed and later supplemented, holding Haile ineligible for asylum and withholding but denying CAT deferral.
- Haile challenged the ELF designation, her terrorist-activity findings, and CAT deferral eligibility; the Ninth Circuit reviews de novo the agency decisions where appropriate.
- The court ultimately granted CAT deferral, finding endangered torture more likely than not upon return to Eritrea.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| ELF as terrorist organization and Haile's terrorist activities | Haile contests ELF's designation and her own conduct as non-terrorist. | ELF qualifies as a Tier III terrorist organization and Haile engaged in terrorist activities. | ELF is a terrorist organization; Haile engaged in terrorist activities. |
| Relief eligibility after terrorist activity | Hale argues remaining relief avenues may exist despite terrorism bars. | Terrorism bars block asylum and withholding; CAT deferral remains available. | Haile is ineligible for asylum/withholding but may seek CAT deferral. |
| CAT deferral adequacy given evidence | BIA improperly relied on suppositions and ignored corroborated record evidence. | Deferral denial based on record evidence and statutory standards is supported. | Deferral of removal under CAT is warranted on the record. |
Key Cases Cited
- Khan v. Holder, 584 F.3d 773 (9th Cir. 2009) (reaffirmed terrorism bars and CAT deferral framework under REAL ID Act)
- Espinoza v. INS, 45 F.3d 308 (9th Cir. 1995) (admission of probative evidence in agency proceedings is fair)
- Kamalthas v. INS, 251 F.3d 1279 (9th Cir. 2001) (credibility and corroboration considerations in asylum cases)
- Gu v. Gonzales, 454 F.3d 1014 (9th Cir. 2006) (agency findings must be supported by reasonable, substantial evidence)
- Nuru v. Gonzales, 404 F.3d 1207 (9th Cir. 2005) (evidence in Eritrea human rights context in asylum determinations)
- Morales v. Gonzales, 478 F.3d 972 (9th Cir. 2007) (substantial evidence standard in asylum/relief review)
- Aguilar-Ramos v. Holder, 594 F.3d 701 (9th Cir. 2010) (CAT deferral and related standards post-REAL ID Act)