Katsiaryna Sobaleva v. Eric Holder, Jr.
760 F.3d 592
| 7th Cir. | 2014Background
- Katsiaryna Sobaleva, a Belarusian political activist (member of Malady Front), applied for asylum in the U.S.; her husband’s claim depends on hers.
- She testified to two incidents: (1) October 2009 protest arrest — beaten, detained ~15 hours in an overcrowded cell, pushed to ground; (2) May 16, 2010 stop — shoved against a building, knocked unconscious, diagnosed with a concussion; later received an unexplained criminal summons and then left Belarus for the U.S.
- Sobaleva’s mother reported police repeatedly sought Sobaleva after she missed the court date and threatened the mother’s job.
- An immigration judge denied asylum, concluding the incidents did not constitute persecution; the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed, finding insufficient nexus to political opinion and comparing the facts to prior Seventh Circuit precedents.
- The Seventh Circuit reviewed both agency decisions, credited Sobaleva’s testimony as credible, and found two legal errors requiring remand rather than resolving asylum on the existing record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the IJ/BIA applied correct standard for assessing past persecution | Sobaleva: agency must decide whether she actually showed past persecution (agency-level standard), not whether the record would "compel" that finding on appeal | IJ/BIA: compared facts to appellate standards and precedent implying a higher "compel" standard | Court: IJ/BIA erred by applying the appellate "compel" standard; remand required for agency to apply its independent, less demanding judgment (Sirbu error) |
| Whether the October 2009 and May 2010 incidents constitute past persecution | Sobaleva: combined record (beatings, detention, concussion, summons, threats to mother) supports finding of persecution on account of political opinion | IJ/BIA: treatment was not sufficiently severe or clearly politically motivated; comparisons to other cases undermined claim | Court: agency failed to give a reasoned analysis, mischaracterized and ignored evidence; remand required for proper consideration |
| Whether the May 2010 assault was motivated at least in part by political opinion (nexus) | Sobaleva: visible political insignia, prior arrests known to police, her more confrontational reaction, subsequent unexplained summons and police pressure on mother indicate political motive | IJ/BIA: officers treated companions leniently, did not arrest or mention politics, so motive likely nonpolitical (passport reach) | Court: BIA improperly discounted context and supporting evidence; must consider partial political motivation and reassess nexus on remand |
| Whether the unexplained court summons and post-departure police behavior support a well-founded fear of future persecution | Sobaleva: summons plus threats against mother and persistent police interest show risk if returned | IJ/BIA: summons alone insufficient and no clear improper basis shown | Court: summons must be considered in context with other evidence; BIA gave it insufficient weight — remand to evaluate future fear and asylum eligibility |
Key Cases Cited
- Sirbu v. Holder, 718 F.3d 655 (7th Cir. 2013) (agency must assess whether applicant has actually shown past persecution, not whether evidence would compel that finding on appeal)
- Cece v. Holder, 733 F.3d 662 (7th Cir. 2013) (agency must provide a reasoned analysis supported by relevant evidence)
- Asani v. INS, 154 F.3d 719 (7th Cir. 1998) (facts compelled a finding of past persecution in that case)
- Dandan v. Ashcroft, 339 F.3d 567 (7th Cir. 2003) (abuse during custody did not compel finding of persecution in that case)
- Nzeve v. Holder, 582 F.3d 678 (7th Cir. 2009) (certain beatings and bruises did not compel a persecution finding; distinguishable facts)
- Ndonyi v. Mukasey, 541 F.3d 702 (7th Cir. 2008) (context can show political motive even if agency posits neutral reasons)