The US Supreme Court has ruled that immigration judges’ findings on asylum-seekers should be given deference by federal appeals courts, unless those decisions are based on “substantial evidence.” The court’s unanimous decision, written by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, upholds the standard of review for immigration cases set by the Immigration and Nationality Act. This ruling comes amid a wave of firings of immigration judges by President Donald Trump’s administration, which is trying to increase deportations.
The case involved a Salvadoran family who fled their country after years of violent attacks from a cartel hitman. The US immigration judge denied their asylum application, citing the fact that they had safely relocated within El Salvador. However, the Board of Immigration Appeals also affirmed this decision, prompting the family’s lawyers to appeal to the federal court.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the lower court, stating that the immigration judge’s decision should be given more weight as long as it is supported by substantial evidence. The court also rejected claims that this standard limits judicial review and instead promotes efficiency in asylum determinations.
This ruling has significant implications for asylum seekers and their lawyers, who will have to navigate a new standard of review when appealing decisions made by immigration judges.
Source: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/courts-must-defer-to-immigration-judges-on-asylum-justices-say