Arulnanthy v. Garland


Case: 19-60760 Document: 00516084747 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/08/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED November 8, 2021 No. 19-60760 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Jeevithan Arulnanthy, Petitioner, versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A215 947 323 Before Jolly, Haynes, and Oldham, Circuit Judges. Andrew S. Oldham, Circuit Judge: The question presented is whether Jeevithan Arulnanthy is entitled to asylum and relief under the Convention Against Torture. We deny the petition on the first ground and remand on the second. I. Petitioner Jeevithan Arulnanthy grew up in Sri Lanka as part of that country’s Tamil ethnic minority. He left in June 2018 and entered the United States through the Mexican border in September. Immigration officials apprehended Arulnanthy within hours of his arrival and determined that he Case: 19-60760 Document: 00516084747 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/08/2021 No. 19-60760 had entered the country illegally. So they detained him in anticipation of removal proceedings. Three weeks later, an asylum officer conducted a credible-fear interview. 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1)(B). Arulnanthy stated during the interview that he feared returning to Sri Lanka based on two encounters with the Criminal Investigation Department (“CID”) of the Sri Lanka Police. The first took place on January 3, 2018, after CID officials discovered that Arulnanthy was planning to participate in a local election as a member of the Tamil National Alliance Party. Arulnanthy explained that the officials “came to [his] home,” “took [him] to their office,” and “kept [him] for two days and beat [him]” while telling him he “should not contest the election and [should] not be involved in public issues.” The second encounter took place on May 19, 2018, after Arulnanthy attended a “memorial function” the previous day. Arulnanthy told the asylum officer that CID officials once again came to his house but found only his mother there. The asylum officer ended the interview by asking Arulnanthy if he would like to alter or add to his statement and if there was anything else of import that they had not yet discussed. Arulnanthy responded “No” to both questions. The asylum officer determined that Arulnanthy had established a credible fear of persecution based on his political opinion as a supporter of the Tamil National Alliance Party. Soon thereafter, the Department of Homeland Security issued a Notice to Appear alleging that Arulnanthy was subject to removal for entering the country at an impermissible location and without the required documentation. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i), (7)(A)(i)(I). Arulnanthy conceded the charges against him, and the immigration judge (“IJ”) found him removable. Arulnanthy indicated that he intended to apply for asylum and withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act 2 Case: 19-60760 Document: 00516084747 Page: 3 Date Filed: 11/08/2021 No. 19-60760 (“INA”), along with relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Arulnanthy asked the Justice Department for relief in February 2019. When asked to explain …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals