Singh v. Garland
19-3031
| 2d Cir. | Apr 1, 2022Background:
- Harjit Singh, an Indian national, alleged two attacks by Congress Party members (Oct 2012, Feb 2013) and that police protected the attackers.
- He applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection; an IJ denied relief based on an adverse credibility finding and the BIA affirmed.
- Contradictions existed between Singh's testimony and affidavits: his fathers affidavit stated Singh had been attacked "and the police," while Singh said his father spoke figuratively.
- Singh testified he reported the October 2012 attack to police accompanied by his father and the village head, but his father's affidavit only said Singh "went to the police station," and there was no independent corroboration of a police report.
- Multiple corroborating affidavits (from an uncle, the village head, and a local official) were nearly identical to the fathers affidavit; Singh admitted his father prepared all witness affidavits.
- The Second Circuit held that, under the totality of circumstances, substantial evidence supported the IJs adverse credibility finding, which was dispositive of all forms of relief.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adverse credibility determination | Singh: testimony credible; inconsistencies explainable | Govt: cumulative inconsistencies, omissions, and prepared affidavits undermine credibility | Court: Defer to IJ; substantial evidence supports adverse credibility |
| Conflict between Singh and father's affidavit | Singh: father's language was figurative, not literal contradiction | Govt: affidavit contradicts Singh's testimony; agency need not accept "figurative" explanation | Court: Reasonable to credit the affidavit; no compelled acceptance of figurative reading |
| Failure to corroborate police report/companions | Singh: he reported to police accompanied by father and village head | Govt: father's affidavit omits companions; no independent corroboration of report | Court: Omission and lack of corroboration reasonably undermine credibility |
| Striking similarity of supporting affidavits | Singh: affidavits are from distinct, independent witnesses | Govt: affidavits nearly identical and likely prepared by Singh's father (admitted) | Court: IJ reasonably inferred common source; similarity supports adverse credibility |
| Effect on relief (asylum/withholding/CAT) | Singh: merits of relief should be considered | Govt: adverse credibility defeats all claims based on same factual predicate | Court: Adverse credibility dispositive; all relief denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Xue Hong Yang v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 426 F.3d 520 (2d Cir. 2005) (standard for reviewing IJ decisions as modified by the BIA)
- Hong Fei Gao v. Sessions, 891 F.3d 67 (2d Cir. 2018) (review of adverse credibility for substantial evidence)
- Xiu Xia Lin v. Mukasey, 534 F.3d 162 (2d Cir. 2008) (deference to IJ credibility findings under totality of circumstances)
- Siewe v. Gonzales, 480 F.3d 160 (2d Cir. 2007) (record support for contrary inference does not require reversal)
- Majidi v. Gonzales, 430 F.3d 77 (2d Cir. 2005) (petitioner must show a reasonable factfinder would be compelled to credit testimony)
- Biao Yang v. Gonzales, 496 F.3d 268 (2d Cir. 2007) (absence of corroboration may bear on credibility)
- Mei Chai Ye v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 489 F.3d 517 (2d Cir. 2007) (strikingly similar affidavits may support adverse credibility)
- Paul v. Gonzales, 444 F.3d 148 (2d Cir. 2006) (adverse credibility finding can be dispositive of asylum, withholding, and CAT when claims share factual predicate)