Opinion ID: 76909
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Incorrect standard

Text: 21 Sepulveda contends the IJ applied a heightened standard, thus violating the Supreme Court's decision in INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 107 S.Ct. 1207, 94 L.Ed.2d 434 (1987). In Cardoza-Fonseca, the Supreme Court held Congress did not intend to restrict eligibility for asylum only to those who could prove that it is more likely than not that they will be persecuted if deported. 480 U.S. at 450, 107 S.Ct. at 1222. There is no indication in the record the IJ applied an incorrect standard in adjudicating Sepulveda's claim. The IJ found Sepulveda's allegations did not demonstrate a `reasonable' possibility that she, or together, they would be subject to persecution, or harmed or threatened if returned to Colombia at this time. Here, the IJ did not apply the more likely than not standard disapproved of in Cardoza-Fonseca, instead he applied a reasonable possibility standard.