Aguirre-Aguirre v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
121 F.3d 521 (1997)
- Written by Mary Katherine Cunningham, JD
Facts
Juan Anibal Aguirre-Aguirre (Aguirre) (defendant) entered the United States from Guatemala, and the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) (plaintiff) initiated deportation proceedings before an immigration judge (IJ). In the proceedings, Aguirre testified to his activities as a student leader in Guatemala protesting against the government’s raising student bus fares and its complicity in the disappearances of political activities. Aguirre testified he burned buses and interfered with government-run stores. The record also noted that student leaders in Guatemala had been threatened and killed after Aguirre left for the United States. The IJ granted asylum and withholding of deportation, and the INS appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). The BIA found Aguirre had not engaged terrorist acts in Guatemala under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3)(B)(ii) (1994) and was a danger to the security of the United States under 8 U.S.C. § 1253(h)(2)(D) (1994). The BIA reversed the IJ decision, finding that Aguirre’s actions against “innocent Guatemalans” rendered him unworthy of discretion because the criminal nature of Aguirre’s acts outweighed their political nature. The BIA did not consider whether Aguirre would suffer if deported to Guatemala and did not weigh the character of Aguirre’s crimes in relation to his political objectives. Aguirre appealed to the Ninth Circuit, reasserting his application for asylum and withholding of deportation.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Noonan, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 834,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.