Opinion ID: 6520667
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Asylum and Withholding of Removal Standards

Text: Petitioner’s I-589 application seeks asylum and withholding of removal pursuant to sections 208(a) and 241(b)(3)(A) of the INA. To obtain asylum, Petitioner must show that he qualifies as a “refugee” within the meaning of the INA. INA § 208(b)(1), 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1). As relevant here, the INA defines a refugee as an individual who is outside his home country and who cannot return to that country “because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership USCA11 Case: 21-10580 Date Filed: 07/19/2022 Page: 14 of 19 14 Opinion of the Court 21-10580 in a particular social group, or political opinion.” INA § 101(a)(42)(A), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A). Petitioner, as the asylum applicant, bears the burden of proving that he satisfies the INA’s definition of a refugee. See INA § 208(b)(1)(B)(i), 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(i). He can carry that burden by presenting “specific and credible evidence” that he suffered past persecution on account of a statutorily listed factor or that he has a “well-founded fear that the statutorily listed factor will cause future persecution.” Ruiz v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 440 F.3d 1247, 1257 (11th Cir. 2006) (quotation marks omitted). Where an applicant establishes past persecution, a rebuttable presumption arises that he has a well-founded fear of future persecution. See id. If the applicant cannot show past persecution, he must demonstrate a “well-founded fear of future persecution that is both subjectively genuine and objectively reasonable.” Id. Whether Petitioner proves his claim with evidence of past persecution or an objectively reasonable fear of future persecution, the persecution at issue must be “on account of a protected basis.” See Perez-Sanchez, 935 F.3d at 1158. The connection between the alleged persecution and a protected ground is known as the “nexus” requirement. See id. To satisfy the nexus requirement, Petitioner must show that a statutorily protected ground set out in the INA was “at least one central reason” for his persecution. Id. (quotation marks omitted). “A reason is central if it is essential to the motivation of the persecutor.” Sanchez-Castro v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 998 F.3d 1281, 1286 (11th Cir. 2021) (quotation marks USCA11 Case: 21-10580 Date Filed: 07/19/2022 Page: 15 of 19 21-10580 Opinion of the Court 15 omitted). “In other words, the protected ground cannot play a minor role in the . . . past mistreatment or fears of future mistreatment. That is, it cannot be incidental, tangential, superficial, or subordinate to another reason for harm.” Id. (quotation marks omitted). Similar to qualifying for asylum, Petitioner can show he is entitled to withholding of removal by proving that, if returned to his country, his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his “race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” INA § 241(b)(3)(A), 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(A). To carry his burden of proof as to withholding of removal, Petitioner must demonstrate that he “more likely than not” would be persecuted because of a protected ground if returned to his home country. Sanchez-Castro, 998 F.3d at 1286. “The more likely than not standard is more demanding than the well-founded fear standard, so an applicant who is ineligible for asylum is necessarily ineligible for withholding of removal.” Id. (quotation marks omitted).