Chun He Li v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General

Chun He Li, a native of the Peoples Republic of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ final order affirming an Immigration Judge’s decision to deny his request for asylum and withholding of removal. Li alleges persecution by the Chinese Government. He asserts that he and his wife were arrested and fined, and that his wife was forcibly sterilized, pursuant to the PRC’s one-child policy. Our review ends if there is evidence to support the IJ’s adverse credibility decision. There is. We therefore deny the petition.

Background

Upon his arrival in the United States on May 4, 1992, Chun He Li applied for admission into the country. After an interview with INS officials, he was placed in exclusion proceedings and released into the community pending a hearing. Li failed to appear at the hearing, and was ordered deported in absentia. In 1992 and 1993, Li submitted three separate asylum applications, claiming he was persecuted in China because he and his wife had been fined for having too many children.

In 1999, Li filed a motion to reopen, which was granted. A hearing was held on August 26, 1999, at which Li conceded removability, and sought asylum and…

dissenting:

Here is the heart of Li’s asylum claim based on probable future persecution: A citizen of China, Li violated the law of China by fathering three children. A vio *965 lator of the law of China, he has every reason to fear persecution for his violations. This fear of probable future persecution entitles him to asylum in this country. Nothing in the IJ’s decision offers reason to impugn the testimony supporting the claim. Nothing in the opinion of this court offers reason to impugn the claim. Indeed, the IJ found credible Li’s testimony that he had three sons. Nonetheless, the IJ denied Li any consideration on the merits of his probable future persecution claim.

Making matters worse, the IJ discredited Li’s presentation regarding past persecution based on the sterilization of Li’s wife by relying on forbidden grounds for an adverse credibility ruling. To affirm, the court ignores two of our central rules regarding adverse credibility findings: the rule that adverse credibility findings cannot be justified by speculation or conjecture, Ge v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 1121, 1124 (9th Cir.2004), and the rule that “[a]n adverse credibility finding is not based on substantial…

378 F.3d 959 Chun He LI, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent. No. 02-72689. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 7, 2004. Filed August 5, 2004. Bruno Joseph Bempi, Hempstead, NY, for the petitioner. Earle Wilson and Ernesto H. Molina, Jr., United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for the respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Before FARRIS, NOONAN, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges. FARRIS, Senior Circuit Judge: 1 Chun He Li, a native of the Peoples Republic of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' final order affirming an Immigration Judge's decision to deny his request for asylum and withholding of removal. Li alleges persecution by the Chinese Government. He asserts that he and his wife were arrested and fined, and that his wife was forcibly sterilized, pursuant to the PRC's one-child policy. Our review ends if there is evidence to support the IJ's adverse credibility decision. There is. We therefore deny the petition. Background 2 Upon his arrival in the United States on May 4, 1992, Chun He Li applied for admission into the country. After…