Tarawally v. United States Attorney General

Yusuf Tarawally, a native of Sierra Leone, petitioned for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals decision that affirmed the denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. Tarawally claimed he feared persecution due to his political opinion and his membership in a particular social group of former child soldiers. The immigration judge found his testimony not credible, and the BIA upheld that determination. The Eleventh Circuit reviewed the petition and concluded that substantial evidence supported the adverse credibility finding and that Tarawally failed to establish eligibility for relief. The court denied the petition on September 28, 2018.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied Tarawally’s petition for review, upholding the BIA's decision. The court held that substantial evidence supported the adverse credibility finding and that he was ineligible for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection.

The central dispute was whether the Board of Immigration Appeals erred in affirming the immigration judge's adverse credibility determination and the conclusion that Tarawally did not demonstrate past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of a protected ground, specifically his claimed political opinion and social group of former child soldiers.

This case reinforced the high burden of proof required for asylum claims based on membership in a particular social group, particularly for former child soldiers, and demonstrated the deference appellate courts give to adverse credibility determinations by immigration judges when supported by specific, cogent reasons.