Tengiz Sevoian v. John Ashcroft, 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 anecdotal evidence that political prisoners have suffered harm constituting torture does not establish that a specific alien will be tortured in prison
• holding that we may reverse the BIA’s decision only if it is “arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law”
• holding that a motion to remand is the equivalent of a motion to reopen
• stating that the BIA’s decision may only be reversed if it is “arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law”
• explaining that the BIA “‘is not required to write an exegesis on every contention,’ ... but only to show that it has reviewed the record and grasped the movant’s claims”
• noting that the BIA “is not required to write an exegesis on every contention”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).