Soon after his arrival, the United States Department of Homeland Security began removal proceedings against B.C., and he applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). He fled from Cameroon to the United States after allegedly facing persecution at the hands of his government. Petitioner B.C., a native of Cameroon, primarily speaks “Pidgin” English, and reports that he has only limited abilities in the “Standard” English in which we write this opinion. But what happens if an immigration official does not make a meaningful effort to determine whether a noncitizen has limited proficiency in English? Because language barriers can make effective communication impossible, our Court has long recognized the importance of a competent interpreter to ensure the fairness of proceedings to individuals who do not speak English. To ensure testimony is not unfairly characterized as inconsistent, a noncitizen must be able to communicate effectively with the officials deciding his case. Small inconsistencies in a noncitizen’s testimony can doom even those cases that might otherwise warrant relief. But despite the high stakes, the outcomes of these proceedings sometimes turn on minutiae. The stakes in removal proceedings-whether a noncitizen will be deported-could hardly be higher. 19-1408, On Petition for Review of a Final Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals: So says the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in its ruling in No.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |