Zhongmin Ren v. Sessions
691 F. App'x 699
2d Cir.2017Background
- Petitioner Zhongmin Ren, a Chinese national and member of the China Democracy Party (CDP) in the U.S., applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief, claiming fear of persecution if returned to China for his U.S.-based pro-democracy activities.
- IJ denied relief; BIA affirmed (except for one IJ credibility finding concerning the timing of a letter), and Ren petitioned for review in the Second Circuit.
- Ren submitted: an unsworn letter from his wife in China reporting police inquiries about his activities, his testimony about suspicious people near their home, photos of U.S. protests he attended, and four online articles criticizing the Chinese government that he authored or posted.
- The agency found the wife’s letter entitled to limited weight (unsworn, interested witness, unavailable for cross-examination) and found Ren’s testimony and other evidence insufficiently corroborated to show Chinese authorities knew of his activities.
- The agency also concluded Ren was an ordinary, low-level CDP member and that Ren failed to show a pattern or practice of persecution against similarly situated CDP members in China.
- The BIA denied asylum and consequently denied withholding of removal and CAT relief (higher burdens), and the Second Circuit denied the petition for review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Ren has a well-founded fear of individualized persecution if returned | Ren argued Chinese authorities knew or would learn of his U.S. pro-democracy activity (wife’s letter, testimony, articles, protest photos) so he would be singled out | Gov argued evidence was speculative and insufficient to show Chinese authorities were or would be aware of Ren’s activities | Court held evidence was speculative; agency reasonably found no individualized risk |
| Whether Ren established inclusion in a group facing a pattern or practice of persecution (CDP members) | Ren argued membership in CDP and evidence of at least one CDP leader’s arrest showed risk to members | Gov argued evidence showed only isolated action against a leader, not systemic persecution of ordinary members | Court held Ren failed to show pattern or practice; ordinary member status critical |
| Weight and corroboration of wife’s letter and testimony | Ren relied on the unsworn letter and his testimony about suspicious people as proof of authorities’ awareness | Gov pointed to lack of oath, interested-witness status, no cross-examination, and lack of corroboration | Court held agency reasonably discounted the letter and found testimony insufficient without corroboration |
| Applicability of higher burdens for withholding/CAT relief once asylum denied | Ren argued persecution risk warranted withholding/CAT too | Gov argued failure to meet asylum standard means higher standards not met | Court held because asylum was not established, withholding and CAT relief necessarily failed |
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 modified by BIA)
- Dong Zhong Zheng v. Mukasey, 552 F.3d 277 (2d Cir. 2009) (definition of well-founded fear requires subjective fear that is objectively reasonable)
- Jian Xing Huang v. INS, 421 F.3d 125 (2d Cir. 2005) (speculative fears unsupported by record not objectively reasonable)
- Y.C. v. Holder, 741 F.3d 324 (2d Cir. 2013) (requirements for individualized fear and pattern-or-practice analysis)
- Xiao Ji Chen v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 471 F.3d 315 (2d Cir. 2006) (weight of unsworn letters from interested witnesses rests with IJ)
- Chuilu Liu v. Holder, 575 F.3d 193 (2d Cir. 2009) (testimony may suffice only if credible, persuasive, and specific)
- Mufied v. Mukasey, 508 F.3d 88 (2d Cir. 2007) (discussing BIA standard for pattern or practice review)