Jean Ridore v. Eric H. Holder Jr.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that whether the BIA applied the proper standard of review raises a legal question
• holding that the BIA is not a factfinder and must either “find clear error, explaining why; or, if critical facts are missing,” remand to the IJ
• holding that an Immigration Judge’s determination of whether an alien will more likely than not be subject to torture is a predictive finding of fact subject to clear error review
• holding that the jurisdiction stripping provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) do not apply where the petitioner raises a question of law, such as whether the BIA acted within its regulatory authority
• stating that the Board may weigh the facts underlying an Immigration Judge’s discretionary determination de novo
• explaining that the Board reviews factual findings only for clear error and must explain why it is finding clear error

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).