Johana Cece v. Eric Holder, Jr.
733 F.3d 662
| 7th Cir. | 2013Background
- Johana Cece, an Albanian national, arrived in the U.S. in 2002 and applied for asylum alleging she feared abduction and forced prostitution by traffickers after being stalked and assaulted by a gang member nicknamed “Reqi.”
- Immigration Judge (IJ) found Cece credible, accepted expert testimony and State Department reports showing pervasive trafficking and ineffective Albanian protection, and granted asylum, defining a social group of young women targeted by traffickers.
- The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) vacated, holding Cece failed to show a cognizable “particular social group” and that she could relocate safely within Albania; on remand the IJ felt bound by BIA and denied asylum; the BIA affirmed.
- The Seventh Circuit en banc reviewed whether Cece’s proposed group (articulated by the court as “young Albanian women who live alone”) is a cognizable social group under the INA and whether the BIA’s internal-relocation finding was supported by substantial evidence.
- The en banc majority held the BIA erred as a matter of law in rejecting the social-group claim (membership defined by immutable/fundamental traits: young, Albanian, female, living alone) and found the BIA’s relocation conclusion unsupported by the record; the case was remanded. Two judges dissented.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Cece) | Defendant's Argument (BIA/Government) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cognizability of social group under INA | Cece is a member of a particular social group: young Albanian women who live alone (immutable/fundamental traits) targeted by traffickers | Proposed group is impermissibly defined by the persecution itself and is not sufficiently particular or immutable | Majority: group is cognizable (young, Albanian, female, living alone are immutable/fundamental); BIA erred as a matter of law |
| Nexus (persecution "on account of" group membership) | Persecutors targeted women because of these characteristics; trafficking is at least partly motivated by membership in that group | The harm stems from criminals, not the government, and group definition is circular | Majority: nexus remains a necessary separate inquiry; recognizing the group does not resolve nexus but permits further adjudication on remand |
| Internal relocation feasibility | Cece could not safely relocate within Albania because living alone is conspicuous and she was a known prior target; her safety in Tirana depended on living with sister in dormitory | Cece previously lived in Tirana without incident; absence of attacks there shows relocation is reasonable | Majority: BIA’s conclusion lacked substantial evidence/analysis and ignored IJ’s factual findings; remand required for proper consideration |
| Deference to BIA (Chevron and consistency) | BIA’s rejection conflicted with its precedents and with Acosta framework (immutable/fundamental traits) so court need not defer to inconsistent reasoning | Chevron requires deference to BIA gap-filling and policy judgments; other circuits reached contrary results | Majority: court gives Chevron deference but finds BIA’s decision inconsistent with its prior precedent and vacates that legal conclusion; remand ordered |
Key Cases Cited
- Escobar v. Holder, 657 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2011) (discusses social-group definition and limits on defining group solely by persecution)
- Mustafa v. Holder, 707 F.3d 743 (7th Cir. 2013) (mixed-motive standard and burden on government to show changed country conditions)
- Gatimi v. Holder, 578 F.3d 611 (7th Cir. 2009) (rejects social-visibility requirement and discusses immutability)
- Iao v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 530 (7th Cir. 2005) (breadth of protected groups does not alone defeat asylum claims)
- Fatin v. INS, 12 F.3d 1233 (3d Cir. 1993) (framework for social-group identification and nexus requirement)
- Rreshpja v. Gonzales, 420 F.3d 551 (6th Cir. 2005) (contrary holding that young Albanian women targeted for prostitution do not form a cognizable social group)