Appellate Law

CA1: mixed motive oppression y?all

By S. COTUS

Singh v. Mukasey, No. 07-2187 (9/25/08).  The petitioner is from India and claims to be oppressed because of his political beliefs, or the beliefs of his father.  The issue is how to deal with mixed-motives for oppressing someone under the REAL ID Act.

While the Act did not "radically alter[]" this standard, In re J-B-N- & S-M-, 24 I. & N. Dec. 208, 214 (BIA 2007), the REAL ID Act clarified the petitioner's burden to show that at least one of the statutory grounds was "one central reason" for the persecution. In many cases, of course, persecutors may have more than one motivation. In such "mixed motive cases," the law now requires that the protected ground be "one central reason" for the mistreatment, and that it not be "incidental, tangential, superficial, or subordinate to another reason for harm."

Whatever the case, the First concludes that he didn?t show that he was persecuted because of his political beliefs. 

Full post as published by Appellate Law and Practice on September 26, 2008 (boomark / email).