Court Opinion

ID: 9823419
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 09:56:20.484472+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:10:16.098458
License: Public Domain

SCHROEDER, Circuit Judge,
dissenting:
While I agree with the majority that the BIA should not deny motions to reopen by making adverse credibility determinations, I do not agree that the BIA denied this motion by doing so. The motion to reopen was premised upon facts Petitioner created after the IJ had ordered Petitioner removed. He then joined a banned *510church, sent banned books to his wife, and apparently had the authorities notified.
Assuming the facts are true and he did those things, such manufactured facts could not satisfy Petitioner’s heavy burden of showing the result should change. This is what the BIA concluded, citing Matter of Coelho, 20 I. & N. Dec. 464 (BIA 1992), a case that did not involve an adverse credibility finding, but did involve a failure of proof. The law students of U.C. Irvine are to be commended, but I must respectfully dissent from the decision that the BIA abused its discretion.