Background
Petitioners, citizens of Russia, sought asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture based on the Lead Petitioner’s opposition to Russia’s war in Ukraine and alleged past harm. The Immigration Judge denied these claims, and the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed the appeal. The petitioners argued the agency failed to consider past harm cumulatively and failed to address derivative claims.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed the agency’s factual findings for substantial evidence. It held that while the agency must review past harm cumulatively, the Immigration Judge explicitly did so and found the harm did not rise to the level of persecution. Regarding future persecution, the court found the record did not compel a conclusion that the petitioner faced an individualized risk, as he was not an opposition politician or activist and had not been targeted by police. The court also ruled that the agency did not need to separately analyze derivative claims or particular social groups because the threshold determination of ineligibility for past or future persecution was dispositive.
What it means going forward
The petition for review is denied, leaving the agency’s denial of asylum and related relief in place. A temporary stay of removal remains in effect until the mandate issues.