Abulashvili v. Attorney General of the United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that IJ violated applicant’s due process where IJ “supplant[ed] the role of the government’s” attorney by conducting nearly all of the cross-examination
• stating that an IJ “has a responsibility to function as a neutral, impartial arbiter and must refrain from taking on the role of advocate for either party”
• reviewing the denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion
• IJ violated alien’s due process rights when she took over cross-examination after determining that government counsel was not prepared
• “[T]he IJ should have realized that [the noncitizen’s] purported comprehension of English was not consistent with the difficulty he had in communicating, and that observation would have required neither familiarity with his language nor any particular expertise in communication theory.”
• acknowledging IJ’s discretion to question applicants

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).