Garland v. Ming Dai

The INA provides that a reviewing court must accept “administrative findings” as “conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” §1252(b)(4)(B).

Appellant appealed the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit’s decision to overturn a denial of appellee’s application for asylum denial to withhold removal. Appellee sought asylum, it was denied in an immigration court, and later affirmed in the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”). The Ninth Circuit followed a “deemed-true-or-credible” rule, which presumed credibility on the part of an immigrant despite the procedural history. On appeal, the Court inquired as to whether a court can assume that an immigrant’s testimony is credible and true, despite the lack of a supporting finding from the trier of fact in previous proceedings. The Court determined that the rule conflicted with the terms of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The INA provides that a reviewing court must accept “administrative findings” as “conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” §1252(b)(4)(B). Vacated and remanded.