Appellate Law

CA1: Falun Gong petition denied

By S. COTUS

Lin v. Mukasey, No. 07-1658 denies a petition for asylum and CAT relief of a Chinese member of Falun Gong.  The IJ found him not to be credible.  This is really strange, because I thought the Chinese were really giving Falun Gong a hard time.  Yet, the IJ found inconsistences in his story. 
There is a really strange thing about the ?mental? practice of Falun Gong:

Qun Lin said he only practiced Falun Gong about twice a month here, but on questioning about why he did not practice more often, he said that his master had advised him that the best way to do Falun Gong was mentally. In response to the IJ's questions, Qun Lin conceded that he could practice mental Falun Gong in China without anyone ever knowing. Based on this concession, the IJ found that Qun Lin did not have a reasonable basis to fear future persecution if he returned to China.

Okay, the IJ doesn?t get it.  Let?s assume that a religion is practiced mentally.  The Chinese persecute people for saying, when asked, whether they are practicing it mentally.  Essentially, the Falun Gong members are being required to denounce their religion by the Chinese, which they are unwilling to do.  However, the IJ managed to make this legal distinction a factual one, and the First doesn?t pick up on that.

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