• Home
  • News
  • Firms & Lawyers
  • Courts
  • Judges
  • Surveys/lists
  • Columns
  • Verdicts
  • Public Notices
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe

Home > Federal Appeals Court Sends Asylum Case Back to Immigration Board to Reconsider Taliban Threat

Font Size: increase font decrease font

Federal Appeals Court Sends Asylum Case Back to Immigration Board to Reconsider Taliban Threat

By Sheri Qualters All Articles 

The National Law Journal

January 22, 2013

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

A federal appeals court has sent a case back to the Board of Immigration Appeals to "fully consider" whether the Taliban would persecute a Pakistani political and peace activist and his family if they're denied asylum.

On Thursday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Khattak v. Holder vacated the board's December 2011 order, which affirmed an immigration judge's May 2010 denial of the family's joint asylum application, and remanded the case.

Javed Iqbal Khattak; his wife, Naheed Alam Khattak; and their children, Fatima Javed and Shahbaz Khan, are seeking asylum in the United States.

The family lived in Pakistan's Nowshera District and also owned a house in Islamabad.

According to his testimony and affidavits, Khattak was active in the Awami National Party and vice president of the Pakistan International Human Rights Organization. In August 2008 Khattak joined the Nowshera Peace Committee as a volunteer "special police officer" who advised people that the Taliban was not fighting a "fight of Islam."

In the spring of 2009, the family started receiving threatening telephone calls, and the Taliban sent threatening letters about the family to his children's schools.

In July of that year, the family entered the United States on visitor visas. In November, they filed applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture.

In his ruling, the immigration judge cited Khattak's "subjectively genuine fear of returning to Pakistan." But the judge found that Khattak did not prove that fear was objectively reasonable because his special police officer activities made him a target, not his political party activism. The judge also held that Khattak and his family would be safe if they relocated to Islamabad.

Chief Judge Sandra Lynch wrote the opinion, joined by Judge Jeffrey Howard and Senior Judge Kermit Lipez.

Lynch first took issue with the board's lack of analysis in its finding that Khattak did not show he and his family would be "singled out" if they returned. She noted that even if the Taliban targeted him because of his special police work "it does not disqualify Khattak from establishing eligibility for asylum."

A browser or device that allows javascript is required to view this content.

Continue reading

  • 1
  • 2

Next



Subscribe to The National Law Journal

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • Taliban
  • Joyce & Associates
  • Nowshera Peace Committee
  • Pakistan International Human Rights Organization
  • Awami National Party
  • Board of Immigration Appeals
  • Justice Department
  • U.S. Court of Appeals

Key categories

    
  • Immigration Law

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Perelman's Case Against Arlin Adams Thrown Out
    •      
  2. Judge Orders Parties to Hire Neutral Expert to Probe Facebook
    •      
  3. Lawsuit Testing Federal Porn Regulation Allowed to Survive
    •      
  4. Ex-College QB Can Press Claim Over EA's Video Game
    •      
  5. Leave-of-Absence Issues Managers Need to Know
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

Hiring Interns? Be Sure to Do It Right

ACC Weighs in on Arizona's In-House Pro Bono Rules

Ex-Dewey Partners Face New Foe in Firm's Bankruptcy

S&C Adds Linklaters Restructuring Partner in London
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Contrite Companies Can Win Forgiveness in Bribery Cases
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Plaintiffs Want to See Toyota's 'Crown Jewels'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Enron Sandbox Stirs Up Private Data, Again

LegalTech West Coast Wraps Up With Ethics, VC News

In Tricky Prosecutions, Judges Play Peacemakers

Ropers Majeski Tries to Re-Invent Itself
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Fla. Attorneys Lead Force-Placed Insurance Fight

Lawsuit Names Missing Fla. Attorney for Alleged Fraud
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Summer Programs Still in a Drought

Lawyer Not Covered for Alleged Malpractice at Prior Firm
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Firm Takes Another Hit in Bid for 'Unconscionable' Fees

New York's Martin Act Faces Test in Challenge to 2005 Case

Castille Testifies in Favor of 'Civil Gideon' Funding

Workers' Comp Judges Can't Fight Rescinded Raise
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Law Schools Are Looking Beyond LSATs, Says Mich. Dean

Is Freezing Your Eggs the Solution?

Advising Clients on Weather and the Workplace
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Texas Sues BP, Others Over Deepwater Oil Spill Disaster
  •      
    • Subscription Required

'Follow That Escapee!'

Judge Who Tossed Defense Counsel Accused of 'Partiality'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corporate Bribery Case Part Of National Trend
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
  •      
    • Subscription Required

  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media