United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit
Immigration – asylum — China
There has been no substantial change in China’s one-child policy that would justify asylum for an alien who has given birth to two children while in the United States illegally.
“The ‘one-child policy’ is more than thirty years old, so Zheng cannot prevail without showing that ‘China’s enforcement of the policy had become more stringent in her province since her last hearing.’ Liang, 626 F.3d at 989. Zheng cites reports from prior to her hearing which characterized enforcement efforts in Fujian Province as ‘lax’ or ‘uneven.’ Matter of J-W-S-, 24 I. & N. Dec. 185, 193 (BIA 2007) (citing Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, U.S. Dep’t of State, China: Profile of Asylum Claims and Country Conditions 20, 25 (Apr. 14, 1998)). The initiation of family planning campaigns in Fujian Province is not inconsistent with the concept of ‘uneven’ enforcement. If anything, the idea of a targeted, temporary campaign suggests uneven enforcement in the first instance. As the Board has explained, a ‘new report or a new law is not evidence of changed conditions without convincing evidence that the prior version of the law was different, or was differently enforced, in some relevant and material way.’ Matter of S-Y-G-, 24 I. & N. Dec. 247, 257 (BIA 2007) (emphasis added). Zheng failed to demonstrate that the policy is enforced differently now than when the petitioner was ordered removed. Lin v. Mukasey, 532 F.3d 596, 596 (7th Cir. 2008). Therefore, the Board rightly concluded that Zheng’s petition was based on a change in personal circumstances, not a change in country conditions.”
Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, Randa, J.