Mejia-Paiz

Mejia-Paiz v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

Good Law
111 F.3d 720·97 D.A.R. 4956·97 Daily Journal DAR 4956·47 Fed. R. Serv. 8·1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 7581
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 17, 1997No. 95-70174California5,284 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sneed, J.

Opinion by Judge SNEED; Dissent by Judge FERGUSON.

Leonel Antonio Mejia-Paiz petitions this court for review of the Immigration and Naturalization Service’s (INS) denial of his application for political asylum and withholding of deportation. Because substantial evidence supports the decisions of the immigration judge (“U”) and the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”), we deny his petition.

I.

FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW

Petitioner, a citizen and native of Nicaragua, entered the United States without inspection in April 1985. He was detained shortly thereafter by immigration officials and was ordered by the INS to show cause why he should not be deported. In January 1990, petitioner appeared before the immigration judge, conceded deportability and requested political asylum. He fears upon returning to Nicaragua that he will encounter renewed persecution due to his affiliation with the Jehovah’s Witnesses Church. According to petitioner, the Sandinistas believe that the Jehovah’s Witnesses .Church is linked to the CIA.

Petitioner’s alleged problems began in 1979 when the Sandinistas gained control of Nicaragua’s government. He claims that the Sandinistas caused him to resign…

Dissenting Opinion

Ferguson, J.

dissenting:

Today the majority of this panel approves the right of the government to decide the question of who is a Jehovah’s Witness. The First Amendment rejects the right of the government to decide that religious question. “The law knows no heresy, and is committed to the support of no dogma, the establishment of no sect.” Watson v. Jones, 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 679, 728 , 20 L.Ed. 666 (1871). However, in this case, the majority departs from this long-standing constitutional doctrine, doing violence to the separation of church and state.

Background

Mejia-Paiz, a citizen of Nicaragua, entered the United States without inspection on April 1, 1985. In his deportation hearing he testified that he should not be returned to Nicaragua because he had been targeted by the Sandinistas for his religious and political beliefs and activities and feared renewed persecution if he returned. The immigration judge (“IJ”) who heard Mejia-Paiz’s case found his testimony not to be true and denied relief. The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the IJ’s decision “based upon and for the reasons set forth in that decision.”

Mejia-Paiz claimed that the Sandinistas persecuted him on account of his…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.