770 F.3d 1071
2d Cir.2014Background
- Meng, a Chinese native, seeks asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief in the U.S.
- She alleges past political persecution as a public security officer who opposed security fees and reported police corruption.
- Meng entered U.S. as a visitor in 2008 and filed for relief in July 2008.
- IJ Balasquide denied relief and ordered removal; BIA affirmed the denial in 2012.
- BIA and IJ found Meng assisted in persecution by reporting pregnant women under China’s family planning policy.
- Meng challenges the persecutor bar and CAT denial on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the persecutor bar applies | Meng contends her reports were passive or tangential. | Meng’s reports were active and directly contributed to persecution. | Persecutor bar applies; Meng assisted in persecution. |
| Whether asylum/withholding of removal were properly denied | Meng asserts insufficient assistance to constitute persecution. | Meng’s reporting over two decades constitutes assistance with knowledge of consequences. | Denied on the merits; persecutor bar bars relief. |
| Whether CAT relief was properly denied | Past detention and beatings indicate possible future torture. | Past abuse does not establish more likely than not future torture; no likelihood shown. | No error; CAT relief denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Zhang Jian Xie v. INS, 434 F.3d 136 (2d Cir.2006) (active conduct can amount to assistance in persecution)
- Xu Sheng Gao v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 500 F.3d 93 (2d Cir.2007) (knowledge that actions may assist persecution; mere association insufficient)
- Yanqin Weng v. Holder, 562 F.3d 510 (2d Cir.2009) (caregiving/guarding actions may not constitute assistance)
- Yan Yan Lin v. Holder, 584 F.3d 75 (2d Cir.2011) (persecution framework for past events and fear of future harm)
- Melgar de Torres v. Reno, 191 F.3d 307 (2d Cir.1999) (objective fear undermined by lack of continued harm to petitioner’s family)
- Mu Xiang Lin v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 432 F.3d 156 (2d Cir.2005) (particularized evidence required to show future harm)
- Balachova v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 374 (2d Cir.2008) (four-factor test for persecutor bar applicability)