Holding that, for withholding of removal, the IJ and BIA erred in finding that the government rebutted Petitioner's presumption of future persecution because, while the government is not required to present independent evidence to rebut the presumption, it has the burden to affirmatively prove that a past threat is no longer existent in order to show a fundamental change in circumstances or that a persecutor would not pose a threat at any point in the future to establish that Petitioner could safely internally relocate. The Court further upheld the agency's denial of CAT relief. 

Date of Decision

Sign up to stay involved

Enter your e-mail to receive legal updates, action alerts, and more!