BIA Addresses when Death Threats Constitute Persecution

The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that death threats constitute persecution if they are objectively credible and issued by a person or persons with the immediate ability to carry them out. The standard is seemingly in line with circuit court precedent, but the application of the standard is extreme. The Board found that receipt of an anonymous death threat accompanied by the delivery of bullets was not sufficiently credible or imminent.

The full text of Matter of E-M-F-S- can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1422766/dl?inline

BIA Affirms IJ Termination where DHS Failed to Prove Alienage

The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that where neither the respondent nor the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) appears at the hearing and DHS does not present evidence of removability in advance of the hearing, the Immigration Judge does not err in terminating proceedings without prejudice.

The full text of Matter of Tepec-Garcia can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1421526/dl?inline

BIA Finds that Terms of 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship between India and Nepal Constitutes Firm Resettlement of Nepali in India

The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that the terms of the 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship between India and Nepal - which permit Nepali citizens to lives, work, and own property in India - constitute firm resettlement of a Nepali asylum seeker in India.

The full text of Matter of L-T-A- can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1421286/dl?inline

BIA Finds that Cancellation Applicant has not Rebutted Presumption he Lacked Good Moral Character

The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that a cancellation applicant who sustained two DUI convictions during the good moral character period had not rebutted the presumption that he lacked good moral character because “[c]aring for his son and maintaining gainful employment do not constitute an ‘unusual case’ sufficient to ‘overcome the strong evidence’ that the respondent lacked good moral character based on recidivist conduct involving DWI offenses.”

The full text of Matter of Palma-Olvera can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1421101/dl?inline

BIA Overturns Grant of Asylum to Political Activist from Moldova

The Board of Immigration Appeals has reversed the grant of asylum to a political activist from an area of Moldova controlled by separatists. “The Immigration Judge’s finding was based on the fact that the respondent was issued a pretextual summons for his political activity and on country conditions evidence showing that the separatists controlling Transnistria have detained political activists and subjected them to severe harm. However, the Immigration Judge did not properly consider the respondent’s testimony that his son appeared pursuant to an identical summons and was released without incident. While we acknowledge the generalized country conditions evidence relied on by the Immigration Judge, the specific experience of the respondent’s son undermines his claim that he would be singled out for persecution based on the issuance of an identical summons. The fact that the respondent was able to remain in Moldova for several years without being physically harmed after the October 2021 beatings while continuing to publicly engage in political activity also significantly undermines his claim that he would be persecuted in the future. So does the respondent’s testimony that he was able to freely leave Moldova without incident.”

The full text of Matter of N-P-A- can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1420981/dl?inline

BIA Reverses CAT Grant to Snitch

The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that a non-citizen who cooperated with United States law enforcement against a cartel did not demonstrate a clear probability of torture because his fear was based on unsubstantiated statements from a coconspirator and generalized evidence of cartel violence.

The full text of Matter of J-C-A-G- can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1420746/dl?inline

BIA Reverses CAT Grant to Haitian Applicant

The Board of Immigration Appeals has reversed a grant of protection under the Convention Against Torture to a Haitian applicant, finding that “anecdotal reports” (i.e., expert testimony) of Haitian prison guards taking bribes to withhold torture is not sufficient to show that it is more likely than not that the respondent himself will be tortured.

The full text of Matter of W-F- can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1420631/dl?inline

BIA Denies Second MTR Based on VAWA Relief

The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that the statutory provision permitting the Attorney General to waive the 1-year time limitation on one motion to reopen pursuant to VAWA does not provide for a waiver of the numerical limitation on a second motion to reopen pursuant to VAWA.

The full text of Matter of B-S-H- can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1418881/dl?inline

BIA Finds that Single Police Officer's Refusal to Assist does not Establish Government Unwillingness to Control Persecutors

The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that a single attempt to report an incident of harm by private actors to local police, without further harm from the police themselves or evidence of their widespread collusion with alleged persecutors, does not establish that the government, as a whole, is unable or unwilling to protect a respondent from persecution.

The full text of Matter of K-S-H- can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1417811/dl?inline

BIA Finds Administrative Closure was Inappropriate for SIJS Petitioner

The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that an Immigration Judge erred by granting administrative closure to an applicant for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) who did not provide prima facie evidence of eligibility. “Submitting the juvenile court order is particularly important to establishing prima facie eligibility because we otherwise have no way of knowing whether the respondent is subject to a juvenile court order that satisfies the regulatory requirements at 8 C.F.R. § 204.11(c)(1) and (d)(3) and whether a competent court or agency made the best-interest determination required by 8 C.F.R. § 204.11(c)(2)(i).”

“Moreover, even if the respondent had established eligibility for special immigrant juvenile classification, the indeterminate and likely lengthy period of time until he would be eligible to adjust status if his petition were ultimately approved by USCIS also strongly militates against administrative closure.3 The priority date for the respondent’s visa petition is April 23, 2025. As explained above, visas for special immigrant juveniles are only currently available to aliens who filed their petitions prior to July 1, 2020. Considering the extensive, nearly 5-year gap between the currently eligible priority date and the respondent’s priority date, it is not realistic to expect the respondent to become eligible for relief from removal based on his special immigrant juvenile petition within a ‘reasonably short period of time.’ Thus, we conclude that administrative closure based on the respondent’s potential eligibility for adjustment of status at some remote time in the future is inappropriate.”

The full text of Matter of Cahuec Tzalam can be found here:

https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1417396/dl?inline

BIA Limits IJ Review of Asylum Cooperative Agreement

The Board of Immigration Appeals has limited an Immigration Judge’s review of the applicability of an asylum cooperative agreement (ACA). Under the regulation, an Immigration Judge is required to “determine whether under the relevant [ACA] agreement the alien should be removed to the third country, or whether the alien should be permitted to pursue asylum or other protection claims in the United States.” 8 C.F.R. § 1240.11(h)(1). If an alien is “subject to the terms of” one or more ACAs and has not demonstrated that the safe third country bar does not apply, the Immigration Judge shall order the alien “removed to the relevant third country in which the alien will be able to pursue his or her claims for asylum or protection against persecution or torture under the laws of that country.” 8 C.F.R. § 1240.11(h)(4).

“In applying the safe third country bar, the authority delegated to Immigration Judges by the regulation is limited to determining whether any of the conditions discussed in 8 C.F.R. § 1240.11(h)(2) apply so as to render the relevant ACA inapplicable to the particular respondent. Immigration Judges do not have authority to make the determination required under section 208(a)(2)(A) of the INA as to whether ‘the alien would have access to a full and fair procedure’ in the third country because the Attorney General has expressly reserved that statutory authority. Similarly, Immigration Judges lack authority to determine whether it is in the public interest for an alien subject to an ACA to pursue asylum in the United States because section 208(a)(2)(A) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(2)(A), ‘reserves to the Secretary [of Homeland Security] or [her] delegates the determination whether it is in the public interest for the alien to receive asylum in the United States.’” “Immigration Judges may not require DHS to demonstrate that an ACA country of removal is willing to accept a respondent who is subject to the terms of an ACA.”

“[I]f a respondent subject to an ACA claims a fear of persecution or torture in a relevant third country, but has no substantial connection to that country, an Immigration Judge should typically be able to resolve the applicability of the safe third country bar without conducting a full evidentiary hearing.”

What the Board didn’t discuss is the fact that Honduras has only agreed to accept 10 people per month under the ACA. https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/25-625-Honduras-Migration-and-Refugees-JIP.pdf. Thus, requiring IJs to order asylum applicants removed to Honduras without any proof that they will be accepted by Honduras, effectively reads the right to apply for asylum out of the statute.

The full text of Matter of C-I-M-G- & L-V-S-G- can be found here:

https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1416811/dl?inline

BIA Finds no Discretionary Authority to Terminate Withholding Only Proceedings

The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that an Immigration Judge lacks the authority to terminate withholding only proceedings in the exercise of discretion.

The full text of Matter of J-A-N-M- can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1416591/dl?inline

BIA Says IJs are not Required to Accept Stipulations

The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that immigration judges are not required to accept stipulations by the parties. “Immigration Judges have broad discretion in conducting immigration proceedings and admitting and considering evidence. While an Immigration Judge may accept the parties’ stipulations in lieu of evidence, he or she is not required to do so. Nor is an Immigration Judge bound by parties’ stipulations as to the legal issue of whether a respondent has satisfied his or her burden of proof for relief or protection because legal stipulations cannot be binding.”

The full text of Matter of J-H-M-H can be found here:

https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1415986/dl?inline

BIA Rejects Perceived Group Membership as a Basis for Asylum

The Board of Immigration Appeals has rejected the concept of perceived membership as a particular social group, finding that there were be no circumstances in which the perceived members of a group would be socially distinct from the actual members of the group. “[P]erceived membership in a group cannot itself be a cognizable particular social group. Rather, the underlying group is the true particular social group, and where that underlying group as defined is not cognizable, the perceived group is also not cognizable.”

The full text of Matter of L-A-L-T- can be found here:

https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1415356/dl?inline

BIA Reverses Bond Grant to Non-Citizen Recently Convicted of Statutory Rape

The Board of Immigration Appeals reversed the grant of bond to a non-citizen recently convicted of statutory rape and oral copulation with a 14-year-old girl. “The respondent’s behavior reflects a willingness and ability to manipulate vulnerable persons into engaging in unlawful conduct to meet his own desires and to do so at great harm to them.”

The full text of Matter of Cotrufo can be found here:

https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1415166/dl?inline

BIA Finds that NJ Possession with Intent to Distribute a Controlled Substance Statute is Divisible

The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that New Jersey’s possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance statute is divisible with respect to the identity of the controlled substance.

The full text of Matter of Frias Ulloa can be found here:

https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1415141/dl?inline

BIA Overturns CAT Grant to Uzbek National

The Board of Immigration Appeals has overturned a grant of protection under the Convention Against Torture to an Uzbek national despite evidence that he is likely to be detained upon arrival in Uzbekistan, finding that evidence of “ill treatment” and anecdotes of torture in Uzbek prisons were insufficient to show a clear probability of torture.

The full text of Matter of J-A- can be found here:

https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1415011/dl?inline

BIA Overturns Discretionary Grant of Cancellation of Removal to Long-Time LPR

The Board of Immigration Appeals has overturned the discretionary grant of cancellation of removal to a lawful permanent resident who accompanied a 14-year-old girl to buy cocaine and to sell Xanax.

The full text of Matter of MacDonald can be found here:

https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1414981/dl?inline

BIA Permits IJ to Pretermit Asylum Claim without Evidentiary Hearing

The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that an Immigration Judge may pretermit an asylum claim without an evidentiary hearing if the facts of the claim are undisputed and do not make out prima facie eligibility for relief.

The full text of Matter of. H-A-A-V- can be found here:

https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1413846/dl?inline

BIA Finds that IJ Exceeded his Authority in Discretionary Grant of LPR Cancellation of Removal

The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that an Immigration Judge exceeded his authority when he determined that the two children who accused the respondent of the indecent acts were actually not credible. The Board then overturned the discretionary grant, starting that the respondent had not admitted his wrongdoing and thus, had not established rehabilitation.

The full text of Matter of Garcia-Flores can be found here:

https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1413661/dl?inline