OFLC, Aug. 22, 2024 "On August 21, 2024, the Department of Labor hosted a public webinar to educate stakeholders, program users, and other interested members of the public on the changes to the...
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 08/22/2024 "The Department of State (“Department”) is amending its regulations at 22 CFR 40.21(a)(5), and 22 CFR...
Aben v. Garland "Aben was arrested and detained three times; held in unlawful captivity for a total of six days; slapped, kicked, and knocked in the head; beaten with a belt and a stick; suffered...
OFLC, Aug. 15, 2024 "The Office of Foreign Labor Certification (OFLC) has released a comprehensive set of public disclosure data (through the third quarter of fiscal year 2024) drawn from employer...
Cyrus D. Mehta and Kaitlyn Box, Aug. 19, 2024 "Although most U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents must pay U.S. taxes on their worldwide income, the foreign earned inclusion exclusion (“FEIE”...
Gonzalez-Castillo v. Garland
"Petitioner Oscar Gonzalez-Castillo was found to be ineligible for withholding of removal by an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) because there were “serious reasons to believe that [he] committed a serious nonpolitical crime” in his home country of El Salvador. 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(B)(iii). The government only presented one piece of evidence supporting application of the serious nonpolitical crime bar, however. It was an INTERPOL Red Notice, described at greater length below. The Red Notice accused Gonzalez-Castillo of committing “strikes” on behalf of the gang MS13, allegedly committed on a date when Gonzalez-Castillo was in the United States rather than in El Salvador, based on the date of entry found by the IJ. We conclude that substantial evidence does not support the IJ’s finding, affirmed by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”), that Gonzalez-Castillo is ineligible for withholding of removal based on the serious nonpolitical crime bar. This court has long interpreted “serious reasons to believe,” the standard set by the statute for the serious nonpolitical crime bar, as equivalent to probable cause. In this case, the INTERPOL Red Notice cannot, by itself, establish probable cause. The allocation of the burden of proof in immigration proceedings does not change this outcome. We accordingly grant Gonzalez-Castillo’s petition for review in part and remand to the agency to consider whether Gonzalez-Castillo is eligible for withholding of removal. We also grant the petition as to his claim under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”), because the record reflects that the agency failed to consider all of Gonzalez-Castillo’s testimony and statements about the harms he suffered in El Salvador at the hands of state actors, so we remand for more complete consideration of the CAT claim. We are not persuaded, however, by arguments in the petition for review challenging the evaluation of evidence that was discussed or by the argument that that the IJ failed sufficiently to develop the record. We dismiss the petition in part as to his claim for asylum, because the arguments Gonzalez-Castillo raises on appeal with respect to the one-year bar for asylum relief were not exhausted before the BIA."
[Hats off to Amalia Wille (argued) and Judah Lakin, Attorneys; Nicole Conrad and Joya Manjur, Certified Law Students; University of California, Berkeley School of Law, Berkeley, California; for Petitioner, and John P. Elwood, Kaitlin Konkel, and Sean A. Mirski, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, Washington, D.C., for Amicus Curiae Fair Trials Americas!]