Summary
The Ninth Circuit denied Maris Oscar’s petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision finding him ineligible for asylum under the firm resettlement bar. The court held that Oscar’s Chilean identification card stating “Visa: PERMANENT RESIDENCE” was direct evidence of an offer of firm resettlement, and that the subsequent lapse or revocation of that status did not negate the bar. The court also held that substantial evidence supported the conclusion that Oscar had not established an applicable exception based on substantially and consciously restricted residence conditions.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether substantial evidence supported the agency's determination that Oscar was firmly resettled in Chile and therefore barred from asylum under 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(2)(A)(vi).
- Whether Oscar established that the firm-resettlement bar did not apply because his Chilean residence status had later lapsed or been revoked.
- Whether Oscar established the regulatory exception for residence conditions substantially and consciously restricted by the authorities of the country of refuge.
Holdings
- The Chilean identification card stating “Visa: PERMANENT RESIDENCE” was direct evidence that Chile made Oscar an offer of firm resettlement, satisfying the government's initial burden.
- The later lapse or revocation of Oscar's Chilean residence status did not defeat the firm-resettlement bar because the relevant question is whether Oscar received an offer of resettlement, not whether he continued to possess or accepted it.
- Oscar failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the conditions of his residence in Chile were substantially and consciously restricted by Chilean authorities.
Key quotations
“We review the agency’s finding of “firm resettlement” for substantial evidence.” (135 F.4th at 785)
“If an alien has received an offer of resettlement, it does not matter whether the alien has allowed it to lapse—the focus is on whether the alien received an offer, not whether the alien accepted the offer.” (135 F.4th at 786)
“Because substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that Chile made Oscar an offer of permanent residence and that Oscar did not carry his burden of demonstrating that an exception applies, the firm resettlement bar renders Oscar statutorily ineligible for asylum.” (135 F.4th at 789)
Factual background
Maris Oscar left Haiti in November 2014 and lived in Chile beginning in January 2015. He lived there for six years, attended university, worked multiple jobs, received health coverage, and held a Chilean identification card stating “Visa: PERMANENT RESIDENCE.” Oscar reported anti-Haitian discrimination by private actors in Chile, but he did not testify that the Chilean government harmed or discriminated against him, nor did he report the private discrimination to Chilean authorities.
Procedural history
Oscar and his family entered the United States in September 2021 and conceded removability. The immigration judge denied Oscar's applications on October 5, 2022, including on the ground that the firm-resettlement bar applied because Oscar had been granted permanent residence in Chile. The BIA dismissed his appeal in November 2023, and Oscar petitioned the Ninth Circuit for review.