Demiraj v. Holder
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
631 F.3d 194 (2011)
- Written by Carolyn Strutton, JD
Facts
Edmond Demiraj was an Albanian national who was identified by the United States (defendant) as a material witness against Bill Bedini, an Albanian who was wanted in the United States for human trafficking. Bedini kidnapped, beat, and shot Edmond in Albania because of Edmond’s cooperation with United States authorities. Edmond fled to the United States and was eventually granted withholding of removal. Prior to this, Edmond’s wife, Rudina Demiraj (plaintiff) and minor son had also fled to the United States and sought asylum, on the basis of Rudina’s family’s political opposition to Albania’s former communist regime. This application was denied, but Rudina was granted leave by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) to reopen her case after Bedini shot her husband. Rudina’s new petition for asylum for herself and her son was based on her claims that Bedini and his associates had begun a blood feud against Edmond that threatened everyone in their family. Rudina provided evidence that Bedini had in fact recently kidnapped two of Edmond’s nieces and trafficked them to Italy, before they escaped and fled to the United States. The immigration judge and the Board of Immigration Appeals held that Rudina was not entitled to asylum, however, because she had not established the required nexus linking the persecution to membership in a particular social group. After a number of proceedings and various appeals, the matter came before the court of appeals.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Haynes, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 782,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 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.