Asylum Denied.

A Chinese citizen testified in an immigration hearing she found she was pregnant with her second child one month after her husband’s death and was forced to have an abortion. She also testified that during a Christian service at her home in China, police raided her home and arrested her and the other home church attendants. She said she was jailed for ten days, and interrogated with an “electric stick.” After she paid a fine, she was released and required to report once a week to the police station. During her testimony, the woman gave conflicting information about various items, including the circumstances under which she received her Chinese passport. The immigration judge [IJ] denied her application for asylum. In the woman’s petition for review, the Ninth Circuit was called upon to decide “whether an IJ may use the maxim falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus (i.e., false in one thing, false in everything.) The federal appeals court affirmed, stating: “We hold the maxim falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus may be used by an immigration judge, and we deny Li’s petition.”  (Li v. Holder (Ninth Cir.; December 31, 2013) 738 F.3d 1160.)