Singh v. Sessions
690 F. App'x 39
| 2d Cir. | 2017Background
- Khushwant Singh, an Indian national, applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief after leaving India, alleging harassment and threats by government authorities.
- An Immigration Judge denied relief, finding Singh not credible; the BIA affirmed on April 21, 2016. Singh petitioned for review in the Second Circuit.
- Principal factual disputes centered on whether Singh or his family were harassed, threatened, or tortured by Indian police and whether Singh hid with relatives for over a year.
- The IJ relied on perceived internal inconsistencies between Singh’s oral testimony, his written statements, and documentary evidence (including a party letter and his father’s affidavit).
- The IJ also cited Singh’s evasive, nonresponsive demeanor on cross-examination and the absence of corroborating evidence for key claims.
- Because all claims (asylum, withholding, CAT) rested on the same factual predicate, the adverse credibility ruling was dispositive.
Issues
| Issue | Singh's Argument | Sessions' Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether IJ properly found Singh not credible | Testimony and documents show harassment/threats; inconsistencies excusable or due to confusion | Testimony contained material inconsistencies, evasiveness, and lack of corroboration | Court upheld adverse credibility finding as supported by substantial evidence |
| Whether documentary evidence reconciled inconsistencies | Party letter and father’s affidavit corroborate harassment/torture | Documents conflicted with Singh’s testimony and raised additional discrepancies | Documents did not rehabilitate Singh; they heightened inconsistencies |
| Whether Singh’s demeanor and responsiveness justified disbelief | Any confusion attributable to interpreter or stress | Nonresponsive and evasive testimony on cross-examination supported adverse inference | Court credited IJ’s observation of nonresponsiveness and affirmed credibility ruling |
| Whether failure to corroborate was excusable | Fear for helpers’ safety explained lack of corroboration | Failure to provide available corroboration undermines credibility | Court held lack of corroboration permissible basis to deny relief |
Key Cases Cited
- Yun-Zui Guan v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 391 (2d Cir. 2005) (court may review both BIA and IJ decisions)
- Xiu Xia Lin v. Mukasey, 534 F.3d 162 (2d Cir. 2008) (standards for adverse credibility under totality of circumstances)
- Xian Tuan Ye v. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 446 F.3d 289 (2d Cir. 2006) (single material inconsistency can support adverse credibility)
- Majidi v. Gonzales, 430 F.3d 77 (2d Cir. 2005) (applicant must do more than offer plausible explanation to overturn credibility finding)
- Jin Chen v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 426 F.3d 104 (2d Cir. 2005) (deference to IJ credibility findings)
- Shu Wen Sun v. BIA, 510 F.3d 377 (2d Cir. 2007) (evasive, nonresponsive testimony supports adverse credibility)
- Biao Yang v. Gonzales, 496 F.3d 268 (2d Cir. 2007) (failure to corroborate bears on credibility)
- Paul v. Gonzales, 444 F.3d 148 (2d Cir. 2006) (adverse credibility dispositive when all claims share same factual predicate)
- Zhou Yun Zhang v. U.S. INS, 386 F.3d 66 (2d Cir. 2004) (standard for overturning credibility findings)