Liu (not precedential): BIA Ignored Evidence Supporting Asylum Claim From China

Liu v. Mukasey
November 25, 2008
2008 WL 4989132
Not Precedential
http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/071303np.pdf

Judges Scirica, Chagares, and Aldisert
Per Curiam decision

For Ms. Liu, David J. Rodkin of New York, NY. For the government, Ari Nazarov and Paul F. Stone of OIL.

IJ Annie S. Garcy granted asylum. On appeal, the BIA reversed IJ Garcy and ordered removal because the BIA believed Ms. Liu's fear of forced sterilization was too speculative. The BIA relied on one item -- the 2002 State Department Report released in 2003, which notes that China sometimes required families with more than one child to pay a fee.

The BIA, though, did not mention Ms. Liu's specific testimony about China's true policies against families with more than one child and what her relatives actually experienced. The BIA also did not discuss the IJ's findings that supported Ms. Liu's fear.

The BIA cannot ignore evidence supporting asylum-seekers. The Third Circuit explained that agency determination must be supported by substantial evidence. Dia v. Ashcroft, 353 F.3d 228, 248 (3d Cir. 2003). The BIA erred by stating that Ms. Liu failed to offer specific evidence of her fear -- inf act, she did provide specific evidence so the BIA's analysis is not supported by substantial evidence.

The Third Circuit overturned the BIA's ruling and remanded the case for the BIA to render a decision that actually addresses the evidence that the asylum-seeker submitted.