Carlos Silva-Rengifo v. Attorney General of the United States United States Department of Homeland Security

How courts have described this case

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

• remanding the case after clarifying the proper legal standard, thus allowing the BIA to apply the correct standard in the first instance
• finding allegations that impunity for officers of paramilitary and police forces charged with human rights abuses evidenced “willful blindness” by government
• recognizing CAT applicant carries the burden to prove claim
• rejecting BIA’s conclusion that acquiescence requires actual knowledge of torturous activity, and remanding for determination as to whether record demonstrated that public officials in Colombia would turn a blind eye to violence by paramilitary and guerilla forces
• rejecting BIA’s conclusion that acquiescence requires actual knowledge of torturous activity, and remanding for determination as to whether record demonstrated that public officials in Colombia would turn a blind eye to violence by paramilitary and guerilla forces
• “[Acquiescence to torture requires only that government officials remain willfully blind to torturous conduct and breach their legal responsibility to prevent it.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).