Granting asylum requires careful evaluation in each case. Concerns arise regarding John's past involvement in policies violating human rights and suppressing dissent while in the ruling party. His affiliation alone doesn't prove persecution by rebel troops. Investigation is needed to determine if he's targeted for his beliefs. Choosing Canada as a refuge and illegally entering the US raises doubts about his motives and respect for immigration laws. The presence of rebel troops questions the regime's legitimacy. Seeking asylum may not be the best option for John in this case, and I do not think he should be granted asylum solely based on the rebel troops overtaking John's government, even if this dictatorship is allied with the US.

In Lu Xing v. Mukasey, 257 F. App'x 457 (2d Cir. 2007), Lu Xing, a Chinese citizen, was denied asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) agreed with the Immigration Judge's (IJ) assessment that Xing lacked credibility due to inconsistencies in her testimony and record. The IJ also found that Xing's claims of being fired for exposing corruption and her opposition to the Chinese government lacked evidence. Despite some flaws in the IJ's analysis, the court determined that a remand was unnecessary due to the absence of a realistic possibility for a different outcome. Xing's due process rights were not violated, and her motion for a stay of removal was dismissed.

response and argue why john deserve asylum . cite similar cases.

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

Based on the provided information its clear that John faces a precarious situation due to his past involvement in policies violating human rights and ... View the full answer