Urias-Orellana v. Bondi · ¶2

Held: The INA requires application of the substantial-evidence standard to the agency's determination whether a given set of undisputed facts rises to the level of persecution under § 1101(a)(42)(A). Pp. 543–551. (a) Section 1252(b)(4) sets forth the scope and standard of review for courts of appeals evaluating IJ and BIA removal orders; subparagraph (B) provides that “administrative findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” The Court has previously interpreted this provision to prescribe a deferential, “substantial-evidence standard,” Nasrallah v. Barr, 590 U. S. 573, 584, meaning “ `such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion,' ” Biestek v. Ber ryhill, 587 U. S. 97, 103. The courts of appeals have split over the extent to which this standard applies to the agency's…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.