Yoselin Martinez Cazun v. Attorney General United State
856 F.3d 249
| 3rd Cir. | 2017Background
- Yoselin Cazun, a Guatemalan national, was removed in 2014 after a negative credible-fear finding; she later reentered the U.S. and DHS reinstated her prior removal order.
- On reentry she expressed fear; an asylum officer first made a negative reasonable-fear finding, then after counsel obtained a new interview the officer found reasonable fear.
- Because her prior removal order had been reinstated, proceedings were limited to withholding of removal and CAT relief; the IJ and the BIA held she could not apply for asylum.
- The BIA relied on 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(5) (the reinstatement bar) and implementing regulations (8 C.F.R. § 1208.31(e)) that permit withholding/CAT screening but bar asylum applications for reinstated-order aliens.
- Cazun appealed to the Third Circuit, which framed the question as whether § 1231(a)(5) makes aliens with reinstated removal orders ineligible to apply for asylum and applied Chevron deference to the agency interpretation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| May an alien subject to a reinstated removal order apply for asylum? | Cazun: § 1158(a)(1) allows “any alien” to apply for asylum irrespective of status; reinstatement bar does not clearly strip that right. | Government/BIA: § 1231(a)(5) bars “any relief under this chapter” for reinstated-order aliens; agency regs reasonably limit them to withholding/CAT. | The statute is ambiguous; under Chevron Step Two the court defers to the agency and holds reinstated-order aliens may not apply for asylum. |
Key Cases Cited
- Perez-Guzman v. Lynch, 835 F.3d 1066 (9th Cir. 2016) (applied Chevron and upheld agency interpretation barring asylum for reinstated orders)
- Jimenez-Morales v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 821 F.3d 1307 (11th Cir. 2016) (concluded § 1231(a)(5) bars asylum applications)
- Ramirez-Mejia v. Lynch, 794 F.3d 485 (5th Cir. 2015) (held reinstatement bar precludes asylum; sustained agency/regulatory scheme)
- Herrera-Molina v. Holder, 597 F.3d 128 (2d Cir. 2010) (accepted regulation limiting asylum for reinstated-order aliens)
- Fernandez-Vargas v. Gonzales, 548 U.S. 30 (2006) (explained IIRIRA’s strengthening of reinstatement consequences)
- INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421 (1987) (discussed asylum standards and agency discretion)
- Marincas v. Lewis, 92 F.3d 195 (3d Cir. 1996) (interpreted asylum provision’s uniform procedure but distinguished on facts and statutory context)