Thread by @immlawACHall

New published Board of Immigration Appeals decision today.

It is jaw-dropping.

justice.gov/eoir/page/file…

He was struck by officers carrying high-caliber weapons, dislocating his shoulder, cuffed, and told that they were going to cut his fingers off and that they'd gauge out his eye.

BIA says this is not severe enough mistreatment to rise to level of persecution.

BIA upholds IJ finding that applicant failed to meet burden to show that the men who showed up in police uniforms w/ high-caliber weapons and handcuffs were actually cops...

Because he didn't prove that the uniforms weren't fakes & it is common for criminals to carry weapons.

Is it possible for a private citizen to get the same or similar weapons to restrain the victim? If so, cops using service weapons and cuffs probably not acting under color of law.

Question: If the officers were not on duty, what would be the purpose of all wearing the uniforms if not to rely "on their status as law enforcement officers" to threaten and intimidate their victim.

This opinion is really sickening stuff.

Historically, a BIA decision becomes precedent by a vote of the majority of the permanent members of the Board.

But on 9/3/2019, a new regulation went into effect allowing the Attorney General or his designee to designate a panel decision as precedent.

govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR…

Was this decision designated as precedent by a vote of the Board or by the AG or his designee? We have no way to know.

If by a vote of the Board, how close was it? As @Tanvim points out, six new Board members with records of extreme hostility to asylum claims were recently installed. Did their votes make the difference?

https://twitter.com/Tanvim/status/1202998162123894786?s=20

@Tanvim FOIAs have been filed.