A divided Fifth Circuit has denied petitions for review from an Afghan citizen who challenged two Board of Immigration Appeals decisions: one dismissing his appeal from the denial of Convention Against Torture protection and denying his motion to remand for new evidence, and a second denying reconsideration. The court applied substantial evidence review and held that the record did not compel a finding that he would likely be tortured. It rejected his argument that the Board failed to review his claim de novo, noting that the Board independently weighed the evidence, and held that the presumption of future persecution in 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(b)(1)(i) applies to withholding of removal but not to CAT.
On the motion to remand, the majority held that under Suate-Orellana and Milat the Board may screen new evidence for materiality and reliability without engaging in impermissible factfinding, and that it gave record-based reasons for discounting the Taliban summonses, family statements, unauthenticated news reports, and a nephew's declaration.
The full text of Zahid v. Blanche can be found here: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/25/25-60524-CV0.pdf