Authors

VANESSA LEE, Golden Gate University School of Law

Article Title

CASE SUMMARY: SOTO-SOTO V. GARLAND: NINTH CIRCUIT RULES BIA APPLIED THE WRONG STANDARD OF REVIEW AND ERRED IN DENYING A VICTIM OF TORTURE DEFERRAL OF REMOVAL UNDER THE CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE

Abstract

The Ninth Circuit granted a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals decision to deny a deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture. The Board held that the Immigration Judge’s findings granting Delfina Soto-Soto relief under the convention were clearly erroneous. The Board reasoned that the judge failed to acknowledge certain facts that indicate Soto-Soto is not likely to suffer torture if sent back to her country, Mexico. On appeal, Soto-Soto argues that the Board did not apply the correct standard of review. Instead of reviewing the judge’s finding under the clear-error standard, Soto-Soto contends that the Board improperly engaged in de novo review.

The Ninth Circuit determined that the Board applied the wrong standard of review and held that Soto-Soto qualifies for relief under the clear error standard.

Recommended Citation

VANESSA LEE, CASE SUMMARY: SOTO-SOTO V. GARLAND: NINTH CIRCUIT RULES BIA APPLIED THE WRONG STANDARD OF REVIEW AND ERRED IN DENYING A VICTIM OF TORTURE DEFERRAL OF REMOVAL UNDER THE CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE, 52 Golden Gate U. L. Rev. (2022).
https://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/ggulrev/vol52/iss1/5