Document: 537 U.S. 12 IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICEv.ORLANDO VENTURA No. 02-29. Supreme Court of United States. Decided November 4, 2002. The Attorney General is authorized to grant asylum an alien who demonstrates persecution or a well-founded fear on account "political opinion," and required withhold deportation where the alien's "life freedom would be threatened" for that reason. 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101(a)(42), 1158(a), 1253(h)(1). Board Immigration Appeals (BIA) ruled respondent did not qualify such protection based he faced when left Guatemala in 1993. Ninth Circuit reversed then went address Government's alternative argument regardless past because conditions had improved point no realistic threat existed. Because BIA considered this argument, both sides asked court remand case BIA. court, however, evaluated claim itself, holding evidence failed show sufficient change. Held: Well-established administrative-law principles "changed circumstances" question Where, as here, law entrusts agency make basic decision question, judicial judgment cannot substituted administrative one, SEC v. Chenery Corp., 318 80, 88, appellate court's proper course additional investigation explanation, Florida Power & Light Co. Lorion, 470 729, 744. has yet issue, every consideration classically supporting law's ordinary requirement does so here: can bring its expertise bear upon matter; evaluate evidence; initial determination; and, doing so, can, through informed discussion analysis, help later determine whether exceeds leeway provides. Here, seriously disregarded agency's legally mandated role. It independently created potentially far-reaching legal precedent about significance political change Guatemala, highly complex sensitive matter, without giving opportunity matter first instance light expertise. reliance 1997 State Department report inadequate was ambiguous changed circumstances, could lead presentation further current which may well prove enlightening given five years have elapsed since written. Certiorari granted; 264 F.3d 1150, remanded. ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT APPEALS NINTH CIRCUIT. PER CURIAM. 1 Federal statutes authorize General, his discretion, "persecution . [a] they require Nationality Act, 101(a)(42)(A), 208(a), 243(h), 66 Stat. 166, amended, 1253(h)(1) (1994 ed. Supp. V). determined Fredy Orlando Ventura statutory any 1993 "on of" opinion." BIA's holding. 1150 (2001) (emphasis added). 2 consider Government made before Judge, namely, currently Both pointed out Judge held indeed but itself claim. And it might do so. See Brief Petitioner 99-71004 (CA9), pp. 5, 6, 24; Respondent 8, 9, 23. 3 Appeals, case. Instead, itself. decided Ventura's favor, record F.3d, at 1157-1158. Government, seeking certiorari argues exceeded authority own. We agree with should remanded we summarily reverse 4 * shall describe proceedings far. In Ventura, citizen entered States illegally. 1995 began proceedings. 1998 application withholding deportation, 1101(a)(42)(A), 1253(h) testified received threats death harm unless joined guerrilla army, family members close ties Guatemalan military, that, view, guerrillas consequently believed inimical opinions. 5 denied relief. She recognized subjectively guerrillas' interest him politically based. she credited testimony showing (a) many connections (b) very one cousin, army lieutenant served almost years, (c) 1987 uncle, local military commissioner responsible recruiting, attacked by people machetes, (d) 1988 cousin (a soldier) cousin's brother civilian) were shot soldier-cousin killed. Nonetheless, objectively "to demonstrate guerillas' interest" App. Pet. Cert. 22a. added "conditions" significantly. Even "if guerillas" once "interest" "continue motivation inclination persecute future." Ibid. 6 BIA, considering de novo, "agree[d]" "did meet burden establishing faces `on of' qualifying ground ." Id., 15a. "need address" country conditions." 7 reviewing decision, "compel[led]" reject conclusion. 1154 added); see INS Elias-Zacarias, 502 478, 481, n. (1992) ("To finding must find only supports conclusion, compels original)). "generally" permit consideration. 1157. Cf. Castillo INS, 951 F.2d 1117, 1120-1121 (CA9 1991) (specifying review underlying immigration judge). But need "not ... clear compelled if against applicant." evidence, "clearly presumption future rebutted." Hence, concluded, "remand inappropriate." challenges remand. says important. "error," says, "recurring error [that] puts conflict other courts appeals, generally respect role fact-finder remanding similar situations." 11. also Chen, O. T. 2002, 25, p. 23 (referring eight recent decisions from Circuit, which, trend). After examining record, well-established II No disputes govern Within broad limits eligibility here question. E.g., § 1158(a); ed.); supra, 481; Aguirre-Aguirre, 526 415 (1999). CFR 3.1 (2002). circumstances "judicial service judgment." 88 (1943). Nor "appellate intrude domain Congress exclusively entrusted agency." A appeals "is empowered conduct novo inquiry into being reviewed reach own conclusions inquiry." 744 (1985). Rather, "the course, except rare explanation." 332 194, 196 (1947) (describing reasons remand). 9 Generally speaking, place primarily hands. This principle obvious importance context. issue. here. 10 These considerations indicate committed matter. 11 rested conclusion belief — insufficiently circumstances. foundation two reasons. First, is, most, bulk makes considerable occurred. example, December 1996 signed peace agreement, March there cease fire, disbanded fighting force, renounced use force achieve goals," "there marked improvement overall human rights situation." Bureau Democracy, Human Rights Labor, Dept. State, Guatemala-Profile Asylum Claims Country Conditions 2-4 (June 1997). As stressed, parts read contrary. They say (1) even "after cease-fire, continued employ threats" (2) level crime violence now seems higher than past." 3-4. Yet qualifies these statements. second, (as noted) says: "Although past, most cases appears stem common and/or personal vengeance," i.e., politics. (in sections refer) adds context claims opinion, "our experience, party leaders high-profile activists vulnerable harassment usually their home communities." 8. latter phrase "only communities" particularly important fact individual relocate safely within ordinarily 208.13(b)(1)(i) 13 Second, 3.1, 3.2 (permitting reopen appropriate). III 14 conclude applied "remand" rule. petition certiorari. insofar denies agency. consistent opinion. 15 So ordered.

Category: 1