Michael Andrew Gormley Edith Carol Gormley v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General

Bad Law
364 F.3d 1172·2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 7938
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 22, 200419-55265California4,192 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wardlaw, J.

Michael and Edith Gormley, natives and citizens of South Africa, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) final order affirming without opinion the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). The Gormleys do not contest the BIA’s CAT ruling, but argue that the implementation of South Africa’s Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 (“the Act”), designed to ameliorate past discrimination against the country’s black population, has resulted in their economic persecution on account of their race by causing them to lose their longtime jobs and rendering them unable to secure new ones. Mr. Gormley additionally claims that he experienced criminal persecution on account of his race when he was twice robbed by black men, and both he and his wife contend that they fear further criminal attacks if forced to return to South Africa. Because substantial evidence supports the BIA’s decision, we deny the Gormleys’ petition.

BACKGROUND

Michael and Edith Gormley entered the United States as non-immigrant “B-2” visitors for pleasure on June 4, 1999, and received…

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.