2009 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 12-18-2009 

# Ji ang v . Atty Ge n U SA P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 08-2458

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2009 D e c i sion s b y an authori z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " Ji an g v . Atty Ge n U SA" (2009). 2009 D e cisio n s . P ape r 80. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009/80NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

___________ N o. 08- 2458

___________ J I ANQI NG J I ANG, Pet i t i oner

v. A TTO RN EY G EN ER A L O F TH E U N I TED STA TES, R es pondent

____________________________________ O n Pet i t i on forR evi ew of an O r derof the B o a rd o f Im m ig ra tio n A p p e a ls ( A gencyN o. A 96- 266- 375) I m m i gr at i on J udge: H onor abl e R . K . M al l oy

____________________________________ Subm i tt ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

D ece m ber16, 2009 B efor e: M C K E E , H A R D I M A N and C O W E N , C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on fi l ed: D ece m ber18, 2009)

___________ OP I NI ON

___________ P E R C UR I AM J i anqi ng J i ang pet i t i ons forr evi ew of an or derof the B oar d of I m m i gr at i on Ap p e a l s ( BI A) . F o rth e r e a s o n s b e l o w, we wi l l d e n yth e p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. J i anqi ng J i ang, a nat i ve of Chi na, ent er ed the U ni t ed St at es i n A pr i l 2002. She2

app l i ed fo r as y l um , w i thh oldi ng of rem ov al , and rel i ef un der the C on ven t i on against T o rtu re . Jia n g a rg u e d th a t sh e w o u ld b e p e rse c u ted u n d e r th e f a m ilyp lan n in g p o licyif sh e w e re re tu rn e d to C h in a . Jia n g w a s c h a rg e d a s re m o v a b le f o r e n ter in g w ith o u t a v a lid entrydocument . She conce ded r emovabi l i ty . A ft era hea r i ng, the I J deni ed r el i ef, gr ant ed vol unt arydepartur e, and or der ed J i ang r emoved t o C hi na. T he B I A aff i r m ed w i thoutan opi ni on. J i ang then fi l ed a pe t i t i on forr evi ew , w hi ch thi s C our tdeni ed. See C . A . N o. 06- 1 1 6 9 . O n D ece m ber20, 2007, J i ang fi l ed a mot i on t o r eopen w i th the B I A . She ar gued th a t sh e h a d g iv e n b irth to a se c o n d c h ild in th e U n ited S tate s a n d w o u ld b e su b jec t to ste riliza tio n if

re tu rn e d to C h in a . T h e B IA d e n ied th e m o tio n ; itc o n c lu d e d th a t th e b irth o f h er se co n d ch il d w as n o t evid en ce o f c h an g ed co u n tryco n d it ion s in C h ina. T h e B IA fu rth er d eterm ined that the e v iden ce sh e su b m itted d id n o t est ab li sh ch an g ed co u n try condi t i ons i n C hi na t o s uppor ta cl ai m of futur e per s ecut i on. J i ang fi l ed a t i m el ypet i t i on f o rr e v i e w. W e have j ur i s di ct i on pur s uantt o 8 U . S. C . § 1252. W e r evi ew the deni al of a m o ti o n to reo p en fo r an ab u se o f d iscreti o n . F il ja v. G o n za les, 4 4 7 F . 3 d 2 4 1 , 2 5 1 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 6 ) . U n d e rth i s s t a n d a r d , w e m a y r e v e r s e th e B I A ’ s d e c i s i o n o n l y i f i ti s “ a rb i tr a ry, ir ra tio n a l, o r c o n tr a ry to la w .” S e v o ia n v . A s h c ro f t, 2 9 0 F .3 d 1 6 6 , 1 7 4 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 2 ). A n al i en gene r al l ym ayfi l e onl yone mot i on t o r eopen, and mustfi l e the mot i on w i th the B I A “no l at erthan 90 day s aft erthe dat e on w hi ch the fi nal admi ni s tr at i ve dec i s i on w as3

r ender ed. ” 8 C . F. R . § 1003. 2( c) ( 2) . T he t i m e and numberr equi r ement s ar e w ai ved for m ot i ons thatr el yon evi dence of cha nged ci r cumst ance s ar i s i ng i n the countryof nat i onal i ty . I d. W e mustuphol d t he B I A ’ s fac tual det erm i nat i ons i f theyar e s uppor t ed b ys u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e . L iu v . A tto rn e yG e n e ra l, 5 5 5 F .3 d 1 4 5 , 1 4 8 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 9 ). U nderthe s ubs t ant i al evi dence s t andar d, w e ca n r ej ectthe B I A ’ s fi ndi ngs onl yi f “a ny r e a s o n a b l e a d

j u d i c a t o rwo u l d b e c o mp e l l e d t o c o n c l u d e t o th e c o n tr a ry . ” I d . ( q u o t i n g I NS v . E li as-Z ac arias, 50 2 U . S . 4 7 8 , 4 8 1 (19 9 2 )). T he B I A ci t ed t o pr i ordeci s i ons w hi ch di s cus s ed much of t he bac kgr ound evidence Ji ang subm i t t ed. S ee In r e S -Y -G -, 24 I& N D ec. 24 7 (B IA 20 07 ); M at t er of JW - S- , 24 I & N D ec. 185, 191 ( B I A 2007) . I n M att erof J - W - S- , the B I A concl uded that C hi na di d nothave a pol i cyof r equi r i ng the for ced s t er i l i zat i on of a pa r entw ho r eturns w i th a s econd c hi l d born out s i de of Chi na. I n I n r e S- Y - G - , the B I A det erm i ned thatt he pet i t i onerhad nots how n change d countrycondi t i ons . J i ang ar gues thatthes e ca s es con tradi cteach o ther and shou l d b e given l i t t l e w ei gh t . H ow ever, she do es not di scuss th e ru lin g s o f

th e B IA in th o se c a se s b u t ra th e r c ites o n lyto th e B IA ’s q u o tatio n s o f S tate D e p a rt m e n t f

in d in g s . Ji ang argues that s he h as subm i t t ed ev i den ce t hat the B IA did not consi der i n those pri or deci si on s. H ow ever, the ev i den ce she cit es does n ot com pel a fi nd i ng that a C hinese c itiz e n re tu rn in g w ith a s e c o n d c h ild w h o is a U .S . c itiz e n w o u ld b e f o rc ib ly ste ri liz e d . Jian g p o ints ou t th at th e C o u rto f A p p ea ls fo r th e S ec o n d C ir cu ith as a d m o n ishe d the B IA4

f o ri g n o r i n g th e s a me e v i d e n c e o f f o r c e d s t e r i l i z a t i o n th a ts h e h a s s u b mi t t e d - two admi ni s tr at i ve dec i s i ons and a Q & A handbook. Shou Y ung G uo v. G onzal es , 463 F. 3d 1 0 9 , 1 1 5 ( 2 d Ci r . 2 0 0 6 ) . He r e , h o we v e r , th e BI A c i t e d t o i t s o p i n i o n i n I n r e S - Y- Gw h ich a d d re ss e d th a t sa m e e v id e n c e o n re m a n d f ro m th e S e c o n d C irc u it. J i ang cont ends thatthe B I A di d notacc ur at el ydes cr i be the fi ndi ngs of the 2007 St at e D epart m entPr ofi l e on C hi na i n M att erof J - W - S- . J i ang di d nots ubm i tthe 2007 Pr ofi l e w i th herm ot i on t o r eopen. T hus , i ti s notpartof the admi ni s tr at i ve r ecor d. O ur r evi ew i s l i m i t ed t o t he r ecor d befor e the B I A . 8 U . S. C . § 1252( b) ( 4) ( A ) ( “[T] he courtof appea l s s hal l deci de the pet i t i on onl yon the admi ni s tr at i ve r ecor d on w hi ch the or derof r emoval i s bas ed. ”) . M or eover , the Pr ofi l e does nots uppor thercont ent i on thatchi l dr en born i n the U ni t ed St at es t o C hi nes e ci t i zens w i l l nece s s ar i l ybe count ed forthe purpos es of the fa m i l ypl anni ng pol i cy . I ts t at es thatthe Fami l yPl anni ng C om m i s s i on of Fuj i an P ro v in c e , w h e re Jia n g is f ro m , d o e s n o t co u n t ch ild re n b o rn a b ro a d u n d e r th e f a m ily p la n n in g p o lic yif

th e ya re n o t r e g is te re d a s p e rm a n e n t r e s id e n ts o f C h in a . Jia n g a ss e rts th a t th e V ill a g e rs’ C o m m itt e e L e tter s h e h a s s u b m itt e d , alo n g w ith herbackgr ound i nform at i on, es t abl i s hes change d countrycondi t i ons . I n the l ett er , the V i l l ager s ’ C om m i t t ee i nform s J i ang thati f s he r eturns t o C hi na and r egi s t er s herchi l dr en i n the hous ehol d r egi s tr at i on, theyw i l l be cons i der ed C hi nes e ci t i zens and s he w i l l have t o compl yw i th t he fa m i l ypl anni ng l aw s . T he C om m i t t ee s t at ed thatC hi nes e ci t i zens w i th tw o chi l dr en ar e t ar get s fors t er i l i zat i on. J i ang poi nt s t o an ea r l i erB I A deci s i on5

w h ich g ran ted a m o ti o n to reo p en b ase d o n a sim il ar lett er. H ere , h o w ev er, th e B IA re je c te d th e le tte r b e c a u s e it d id n o t s ta te w h o h a d d ra f te d it. M o reo v er, th e B IA n o ted th at th e lett er w as u n d erm ined b yan A p ri l 20 0 7 “R ep o rt of I nves t i gat i on” J i ang s ubm i t t ed. T he r eports t at ed thatvi l l age c om m i t t ees ar e not author i zed t o m ake de ci s i ons on fami l ypl anni ng i s s ues and s uch not i ces s houl d be cons i der ed i nval i d. J i ang ar gues thatC hi na’ s fami l ypl anni ng pol i cyi s i m pl ement ed by l ocal vi l l age c om m i t t ees butci t es onl yt o the B I A ’ s deci s i on i n I n r e J - W - S- , w hi ch quot es the 2007 Pr ofi l e’ s fi ndi ngs thati m pl ement at i on of the bi r th contr ol pol i cyi s the r es pons i bi l i tyof “l ocal offi ci al s . ” Thi s s i ngl e s ent ence , fr om a documentout s i de the r ecor d, does notcompel a fi ndi ng thatthe vi l l age not i ce J i ang s ubm i t t ed s houl d be con si dered v al i d, especi al l yi n li gh tof ev i den ce i n the r ecord d i scoun t i ng such n oti ces. J i ang ar gues thats t er i l i zat i ons can be for ced bym eans otherthan phy s i cal co erc ion , inclu d ing ec o n o m ic pe rsec u ti o n . W h il e “ d eli b era te i m p o sit ion o f se v ere e c o n o m ic d isa d v a n tag e w h ich th re a ten s a p e tit io n e r’s life o r f re e d o m m a yc o n stitu te p e rse c u tio n ,” Z h e n H u a L i v . A tto rn e yG e n e ra l, 40 0 F .3 d 1 5 7 , 1 6 8 (3 d C ir. 2 0 0 5 ), th e re is no evi dence thatthe pot ent i al fi nanci al penal t i es m eetthi s s t andar d. J i ang ci t es t o the B I A ’ s ci t at i on i n I n r e J - W - S- t o St at e D epart m entfi ndi ngs thats uch s anct i ons l eft w om en w i th no choi ce butt o be s t er i l i zed. H ow ever , the B I A i n I n r e J - W - S- concl uded thatthe al i en fa i l ed t o pr ovi de evi dence thatthe ec onom i c s anct i ons w oul d r i s e t o the le v e l o f p e rs e c u tio n .Jia n g h a s n o t sh o w n th a t th e re c o rd w o u ld c o m p e l an yre a so n a b le a d ju d ica to r to concl ude thats he had s how n t hats he w as pr i m a fa ci e el i gi bl e foras y l um bas ed on change d countr ycondi t i ons . M or eover , J i ang’ s ar gum entthats he i s ent i t l ed t o fi l e a su c c e ss iv e a sy lu m a p p lica tio n is f o re c lo se d b yo u r d e c isio n in L iu v . A tto rn e yG e n e ra l, 5 5 5 F . 3 d 1 4 5 , 1 5 0 -51 (3d C ir2 0 0 9 ). F o r th e a b o v e re aso n s, w e w il l den ythe p eti ti o n fo r rev iew . T h e g o v ern m en t’ s m ot i on t o di s m i s s i s deni ed.

6