Amadou Sy v. Pamela Bondi

No. 25-3631; File Name: 26a0062p.06 · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · March 3, 2026 · No. No. 25-3631

Summary

The Sixth Circuit denied Amadou Sy’s petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision denying asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The court held that substantial evidence supported the agency’s adverse credibility determination based on inconsistencies, implausible similarities in Sy’s accounts of arrest, and insufficient corroboration. The court also upheld the finding that Sy had not established a pattern or practice of persecution against black Fulanis in Mauritania.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Amul R. Thapar; Alice M. Batchelder; Andre B. Mathis
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decision date
March 3, 2026
Docket number
No. 25-3631
Procedural posture
Petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals decision dismissing Sy's appeal from an immigration judge's denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture protection.
Standard of review
Legal questions are reviewed de novo, while factual findings, including credibility determinations, are reviewed for substantial evidence. Agency determinations stand unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to disagree.
Precedential value
Published and recommended for publication under Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b).
Parties
Amadou Sy v. Pamela Bondi, Attorney General
Disposition
other

Topics

asylumremoval proceedingsjudicial review of agency actionstandard of reviewappellate procedure

Practice areas

ImmigrationAsylumAppellate procedureAdministrative law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether substantial evidence supported the agency's adverse credibility determination.
  2. Whether substantial evidence supported the Board's finding that black Fulanis in Mauritania do not face a pattern or practice of persecution.
  3. Whether the adverse credibility determination was fatal to Sy's claims for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection.

Holdings

  1. The agency's determination that Sy was not credible was supported by substantial evidence.
  2. The adverse credibility determination was fatal to Sy's claims for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection.
  3. Substantial evidence supported the Board's finding that black Fulanis in Mauritania do not face a pattern or practice of persecution.

Key quotations

That means the Board’s determinations must “stand unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to disagree.” (5)
This inconsistency alone provides substantial evidence to support the determination that Sy wasn’t credible. (5)
And that finding is “fatal” to Sy’s petitions for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection. (7)
After all, “persecution is an extreme concept that does not include every sort of treatment our society regards as offensive.” (8)

Factual background

Amadou Sy, a Mauritanian national and member of the Fulani ethnic group, entered the United States unlawfully and was placed in removal proceedings. He claimed that Mauritanian police repeatedly arrested, detained, beat, and tortured him because he was black and had participated in protests, but his written application omitted alleged persecution of his brothers and his testimony described nearly identical arrests with inconsistencies concerning his passport and departure from Mauritania. Sy provided no testimony or declaration from a brother who allegedly witnessed several arrests and no medical records from alleged hospital visits. The immigration judge and Board found him not credible and determined that black Fulanis in Mauritania faced discrimination, not a pattern or practice of persecution.

Procedural history

Sy admitted removability and applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection. The immigration judge denied relief after finding that Sy was not credible and that he failed to establish a pattern or practice of persecution against black Fulanis in Mauritania. The Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed his appeal, and the Sixth Circuit denied his petition for review.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…