Urias-Orellana v. Bondi · ¶1
This case presents the question whether the courts of appeals must apply substantial-evidence review to the Board of Immigration Appeals' determination whether a given set of undisputed facts constitutes “persecution” under 8 U. S. C. § 1101(a)(42). Petitioners Douglas Humberto Urias-Orellana, his wife Sayra Iliana Gamez-Mejia, and their minor child G. E. U. G. are natives of El Salvador who entered the United States without authorization in 2021. After being placed in removal proceedings, petitioners applied for asylum. Under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), the U. S. Government “may grant asylum” to a noncitizen if it “determines” that he “is a refugee.” §1158(b)(1)(A). An asylum seeker qualifes as a “refugee” if he “is unable or unwilling to return” to his country of nationality “because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion,…Read in context ›
preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.