Summary
This Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals opinion reviews a Board of Immigration Appeals decision denying asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief to a Zambian national claiming persecution based on her sexual orientation. Although the panel found substantial evidence supported the immigration judge's adverse credibility determination, it held that the agency improperly evaluated the petitioner's supporting documentary evidence independently of her testimony. The court granted the petition for review and remanded the case with instructions for the agency to reassess whether the documents independently establish past persecution.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the agency properly evaluated Kalulu's supporting documents to independently prove past persecution.
- Whether the agency's adverse credibility determination was supported by substantial evidence.
- Whether the case should be remanded for further agency consideration.
Holdings
- The court remands the case, directing the agency to reexamine the three declarations and medical document to determine whether, when properly read, they independently prove Kalulu's past persecution claim.
- The agency's adverse credibility determination is amply supported by substantial evidence and therefore is upheld.
Key quotations
“We grant the petition and remand this case with instructions for the agency to consider whether those documents, when properly read, independently prove those claims.” (at 5)
Factual background
Milly Kalulu, a native of Zambia who identifies as a lesbian, alleged persecution by her girlfriend's brothers in 2019. She entered the U.S. on a tourist visa, was later placed in removal proceedings after a border inspection, and applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief, offering documentary evidence of attacks.
Procedural history
The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the immigration judge's adverse credibility determination and denied asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief. Kalulu appealed to the Ninth Circuit, which granted review, found substantial evidence supporting the credibility finding, but held the agency failed to properly evaluate supporting documents, and remanded for further consideration.
Remand instructions
Agency must reexamine the three eyewitness declarations and the medical document to determine whether, when properly read, they independently prove Kalulu's past persecution claim.