09-3179 Jiang v. Holder

Listen to this article

Immigration
Asylum; motions to reopen

Where the evidence an asylum claimant offered in her motion to reopen was available at the original hearing, the motion was properly denied.

“Nor can Jiang rely on her claim that because she has had two children in the United States she will face persecution in China for violations of that country’s one-child policy. That argument has been vetted in this court and rejected. See Joseph, 579 F.3d at 834. Cheng Chen v. Gonzales, 498 F.3d 758, 760 (7th Cir. 2007). This is not to say that an applicant for asylum must show some broad social or political alteration in the country conditions, as opposed to a more personal or local modification, but an applicant cannot claim changed country conditions based on her own actions in the United States when the conditions in the country of origin have not materially changed. Joseph, 579 F.3d at 834. Jiang has offered no evidence that the population control efforts and one-child policy have materially changed since the date of her initial hearing.”

Petition Denied.

09-3179 Jiang v. Holder

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, Rovner, J.

Full Text