Tag: immigration attorney st pete florida

Guess What? Country Reports are Not Dispositive in Future Fear Determinations (Just Like We Have Been Saying)

Just like every immigration practitioner has been arguing for a long time, the Eleventh Circuit recently ruled that the State Department’s country reports are not dispositive on future fear determinations. The Petitioner in the case was denied his asylum claim before the immigration judge and the Board of Immigration Appeals. Both had ruled that he could not show that he faces any prospects of future persecution. He had argued that he faces such prospects because he had applied for asylum and his application was denied. The immigration judge had denied his claim since the State Department’s 2011 country report was silent regarding the persecution of failed asylum seekers.

The court ruled that the State Department’s report is not exhaustive and can not rebut a specific applicant’s claim without specifically commenting on that case. The court granted the petition for review and remanded the case to the Board.

I ¬†have argued on several occasions that these reports were unreliable. I also argue that the client has a right to confront the report’s author. I applaud the case. If you would like to read it, visit this link.

Seventh Circuit Rules that BIA Erred in Relying on Unsupported Police Reports

In a decision dated last month, the Seventh Circuit ruled that the Board of Immigration Appeals erred in relying on uncorroborated police reports to deny 212(c) relief. The Petitioner in the case was convicted in 1990 of a domestic abuse charge. He was subsequently arrested several times but was never convicted of anything else.  The immigration judge ruled that he was credible but denied his request for relief since he did not show that he was rehabilitated. The BIA affirmed the immigration judge’s decision reasoning that even though the case was a “close call”, the Respondent did not show that he was rehabilitated. The court, in reversing the BIA’s decision, reasoned that the Board did not follow its own binding decision in Arreguin, 21 I&N Dec. 38 (BIA 1995) and thus the case was denied improperly. The court ruled that since the police reports were uncorroborated, they should not have been used as a basis to deny relief in the case. The case is Avila-Ramirez v. Holder