Skip to main content

The Seventh Circuit found that the analysis of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which denied the client’s asylum claim without addressing credibility, simply did not make sense.
 
Ms. Kadia is an asylum-seeker from Cameroon.  The Immigration Judge denied her claim, finding her to lack credibility; the Immigration Judge also held that she couldn't show a nexus to her persecution (due to her imputed status as one opposed to the regime), because her testimony was too "weak." The BIA affirmed, “with additions” - it agreed with the Immigration Judge that she didn't offer enough evidence to show the nexus prong, and thus, “we need not address the Immigration Judge’s adverse credibility finding.”  The case was remanded to permit the BIA to engage in a “reasoned analysis.” This case illustrates the failure of the immigration court system to properly adjudicate cases and it is hoped that this will spur reform of the system.
 
Ms. Kadia was represented by pro bono attorney Christopher Paolella, of Winston & Strawn, LLP, and by the National Immigrant Justice Center.
 
Read the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals opinion, 557 F.3d 464 (7th Cir. 2009)
.
 
Read the opening brief, government response, and reply brief.
 
Read the National Immigrant Justice Center's litigation blog entry on this case.