Harpal Singh Cheema Rajwinder Kaur v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General

Opinion by Judge NOONAN; Dissent by Judge RAWLINSON.

Harpal Singh Cheema (Cheema) and his wife Rajwinder Kaur (Kaur) petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (the Board) denying them asylum and the withholding of deportation and holding them eligible for relief under the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) but granting them only deferral of removal. We hold that the Board’s denial of withholding and asylum for Rajwinder Kaur cannot be sustained because of the lack of any evidence that reasonable grounds exist to believe that she is a danger to the security of the United States. We remand to permit the Board to exercise discretion on the withholding and asylum petitions of Cheema. We sustain the Board’s deferral of removal for both Kaur and Cheema and its denial of full relief to Cheema under CAT.

FACTS

Cheema is a Sikh, born in India in 1958. He is a lawyer and a member of the Sikh Lawyers Association. In 1987, he helped to organize an enormous rally to protest the government of India’s decision to divert water from the Punjab. Shortly after this public event, Indian police arrested *1149…

dissenting:

I must respectfully dissent.

Our review of asylum rulings made by the BIA has been curtailed in recent years. We may now reverse the BIA’s factual findings made in the context of ruling on an asylum application only if a contrary finding is compelled by the evidence. See Gonzalez-Hemandez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 995 , 998(9th Cir.2003). We must also defer to the BIA’s interpretation of immigration law. See Vasquez-Lopez v. Ashcroft, 315 F.3d 1201,1203 (9th Cir.2003).

Here is what the evidence in this case showed:

It is not difficult to connect the dots from Cheema and his wife to Panjwar to Bittu and back again. The BIA’s finding that Cheema materially supported terrorist activity is bolstered by substantial evidence, including Cheema’s own testimony.

A finding that Cheema provided material support to major international terrorists in turn substantiates the BIA’s finding that Cheema and his wife threaten the security of this country. Car bombings, assassinations of government officials, massacres — world wars have begun with less impetus. See Zenith Radio Corp. v. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co., 494 F.Supp. *1159 1190, 1219 (E.D.Pa.1980) (“On June 28, 1914, the…

372 F.3d 1147 Harpal Singh CHEEMA; Rajwinder Kaur, Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent. No. 02-71311. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted April 9, 2003. Filed June 24, 2004. As Clarified August 6, 2004. Robert B. Jobe, San Francisco, CA, for the petitioners. Ethan B. Kanter, Department of Justice, Office of Immigration and Litigation, Washington, DC, for the respondent. Ravinder S. Bhalla, Krovatin & Associates, LLC; Newark, NJ, for amicus curiae the Sikh Coalition. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Before NOONAN, McKEOWN, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges. Opinion by Judge NOONAN; Dissent by Judge RAWLINSON. NOONAN, Circuit Judge: 1 Harpal Singh Cheema (Cheema) and his wife Rajwinder Kaur (Kaur) petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (the Board) denying them asylum and the withholding of deportation and holding them eligible for relief under the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) but granting them only deferral of removal. We hold that the Board's denial of withholding and asylum for Rajwinder Kaur…