Background
Xiang Zhang Cao, a native and citizen of the People’s Republic of China, sought asylum and withholding of removal. An Immigration Judge denied his application, and the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed his appeal. Cao petitioned for review in the Ninth Circuit.
The court’s reasoning
The panel concluded that substantial evidence supported the agency’s adverse credibility finding. The court noted that while some reasons relied upon by the agency were unsupported, disregarding those reasons left substantial evidence to support the determination that Cao was not credible. The court further held that an applicant who committed immigration fraud must provide evidence that overrides their intentional deception to the point that the record compels disregarding the fraud. Cao admitted to lying on his visa application, and the Immigration Judge found he committed immigration fraud. Consequently, the court found substantial evidence supported the agency’s conclusion that Cao did not show entitlement to relief.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces the standard that immigration fraud requires a high burden of proof to overcome, and that credibility findings can be upheld if substantial evidence remains after removing unsupported rationales.