Sarr v. Gonzales

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that we may look to IJ’s reasoning when it is “all that can give substance to the BIA’s reasoning”
• explaining that this court does not affirm on grounds raised by the IJ unless the BIA also relies on the same grounds in its decision
• noting that BIA decisions are reviewed for “substantial evidence” and thus, that the BIA’s “findings of fact are conclusive unless the record demonstrates that any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary” (quotation and citation omitted)
• reversing BIA’s adverse credibility determination and recognizing that “[a]sylum applicants rarely speak English, and their testimony is plagued with the uncertainties of translation and cultural misunderstanding”
• noting, for example, that clarification may be obtained from IJ’s decision when BIA’s order “incorporates by reference the IJ’s rationale” or “repeats a condensed version of the IJ’s reasons while also relying on the IJ’s more complete discussion”
• “We do not weigh the evidence or evaluate the witnesses’ credibility [when reviewing IJ/BIA decisions].” (brackets, ellipsis, and internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).