Recent Immigration Law Decisions

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today that opposition to China's one-child policy, absent further evidence of persecution, does not justify an immigration appeal reversal.

A three-judge panel denied petitioner Chun Hua Zheng's asylum denial appeal, finding that Zheng had not demonstrated that it was more likely than not that she would be persecuted for her political opinions if she returned to China.

A person "who has been persecuted for ... resistance to a coercive population control program," is considered to have been "persecuted on account of political opinion" under U.S. law. By that reasoning, Zheng's opposition to China's one-child policy was a strong start to proving her political persecution argument.

We think Reza Baniassadi suspected that his reputation in the Chicago legal community would be compromised when the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals dedicated one-third of its opinion in a recent immigration appeal to criticizing his performance as an attorney.

Baniassadi's client, Alicja Wroblewska, is a Polish citizen who came to the U.S. in 1994 on a visitor's visa. She overstayed her visa and was caught allegedly trying to bribe an immigration officer in November 1999 in Operation Durango, an Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) operation that the Seventh Circuit previously described as "a shady sting."

Revocation of Jordanian citizen's advance parole

Samirah v. Holder, 08-1889, concerned a Jordanian citizen's petition for writ of mandamus seeking to direct the Attorney General to enable him to return to the United States for the purpose of reacquiring his status as an alien eligible for an adjustment of status.

Challenge to the sentence in conviction for unlawful entry

US v. Perez-Molina, 10-2427, concerned a challenge to the district court's imposition of 34-month sentence, more than twice as long as the high end of the applicable sentencing guideline range, in a conviction of defendant for unlawful entry into the United States following removal.  In affirming the sentence, the court held that the district court adequately justified its above-guideline sentence and acted well within its discretion by imposing a higher sentence to deter the defendant from continued reentry and criminal activity in the United States.

Chinese citizen's claim of changed country conditions based on China's "one-child" policy

Liang v. Holder, 09-3713, concerned a Chinese citizen's petition for review of the BIA's denial of a motion to reopen and again apply for asylum, withholding of removal and CAT protection.  In denying the petition, the court held that the BIA gave a rational explanations for its conclusion that petitioner failed to show changed country conditions regarding China's "one-child" policy, in her home province since the time of her initial asylum hearing.  Further, the BIA's decision did not inexplicably depart from established policies or rest on an impermissible basis.

Petition for review a denial of Mexican citizen's application for a 212(c) waiver

Mata-Guerrero v. Holder, 10-1664, concerned a Mexican citizen's petition for review of the BIA's affirmance of an IJ's denial of petitioner's application for a 212(c) waiver, on the ground that petitioner's failure to register as a sex offender was a crime of moral turpitude.

Nigerian citizen's petition for review of a denial of her application for cancellation of removal

Champion v. Holder, 09-3065, concerned a Nigerian citizen's petition for review of a BIA's affirmance of an IJ's denial of her application for cancellation of removal.  In granting the petition, the court held that, although the BIA's findings with respect to petitioner's due process claims is affirmed as she had a full opportunity to present her case and the IJ did not consider improper information, the BIA's decision is vacated and remanded because petitioner's claim that the possibility of the deportation of the children's father would constitute an extremely unusual hardship was not addressed.

Indian citizen's petition for review of BIA's denial of his application for asylum denied

Vahora v. Holder, 09-3033, concerned a petition for review of a BIA's affirmance of an IJ's denial of petitioner's application for asylum and grant of a voluntary departure, brought by a native of India on the basis of his Muslim faith.