Pan v. Holder
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
777 F.3d 540 (2015)
- Written by Mary Katherine Cunningham, JD
Facts
In May 2008, Aleksandr Pan (defendant) entered the United States from the Kyrgyz Republic, claiming asylum due to persecution he faced as an ethnic Korean Evangelical Christian. Attorney General Eric Holder (plaintiff) initiated deportation proceedings before an immigration judge (IJ). At the removal proceedings, Pan testified that police officers came to his family’s home and harassed the family for their faith. Pan testified that his father started a church and that, while proselytizing on behalf of the church in 2005, four men attacked and beat Pan. Pan testified that he did not report the incident to the police because the police were very corrupt and may have attacked him for his faith. Pan’s maternal aunt testified on his behalf, asserting that while attending the church ran by Pan’s father, she was attacked by five men. The affidavit in support of Pan’s aunt’s asylum application was also submitted to the court, detailing that the police threatened Pan’s aunt and father if they proselytized to ethnic Kyrgyz. The IJ credited Pan’s testimony but found that the mistreatment Pan suffered were “at best, hate crimes.” The IJ also found that Pan failed to show that the Kyrgyz government was unable or unwilling to protect ethnic Koreans or Evangelical Christians. Pan appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which affirmed the IJ’s decision. Pan appealed to the Second Circuit, petitioning for review of his asylum claim.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Walker, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 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.