The United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) on Tuesday said federal courts have a limited role in reviewing the findings of the immigration judge, reversing a decision from the Ninth Circuit appellate court that helped provide immigration relief to illegal aliens seeking asylum.
Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in a 9-0 decision with “none of” that “thinks anything like the decoration adopted by the Ninth Circuit” when it comes to the testimony of an illegal alien in a case of immigration must be considered credible and true if not explicitly stated otherwise by an immigration judge or the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).
“The supposedly-true-or-credible rule of the Ninth Circuit cannot be reconciled in INA terms,” Gorsuch wrote in unanimous opinion.
Cesar Alcaraz-Enriquez, who was previously deported as an illegal immigrant from Mexico, and Ming Dai, a Chinese national who first arrived on a B-2 tourist visa, have sought asylum in the U.S..
In Alcaraz-Enriquez’s case, at the conclusion of his hearing before a federal immigration judge, he admitted that he needed asylum in the U.S. because his life in Mexico would be in danger if he was deported. The evidence in the case reveals that Alcaraz-Enriquez did not plead for any dispute in California to damage the spouse’s corporal injury or residence and was sentenced to two years in prison.
Stressed out if it was a “more serious crime,” Alcaraz-Enriquez said he was bothered by his 17-year-old girlfriend because he believed his daughter had been hit, and so he was hit.- READ MORE
Listen to the insightful Thomas Paine Podcast Below –