Gabriel Perez Cruz v. Barr, (July 2 2020) U.S. Court of Appeals 9th Circuit. NIWAP assisted the Family Violence Appellate Project in California in developing, securing social science support for and national sign ons from 16 organizations nationally for this 9th Circuit Amicus Brief in which we were represented by Haney and Boone LLP. The brief discussed the mental health impact of domestic violence and coercive control in abusive relationships and perpetrators who coerce their victims into committing crimes, and the need for courts to consider these factors when adjudicating a domestic violence victim’s withholding of removal claims and particularly whether they crime they committed was a “particularly serious crime.”

Topics addressed in this Amicus Brief:

• When conducting the “particularly serious crime” analysis for a withholding of removal claim, immigration judges should consider the impacts of domestic violence on a petitioner’s mental health…11
• Scientific literature and case law both recognize that domestic violence can impact a person’s mental health. …………………………11
• Where an applicant has survived domestic violence, immigration judges should explore at least three factors that are relevant to assessing an applicant’s mental state at the time of the crime. …13
• When assessing claims under the Convention Against Torture, immigration judges should consider evidence from domestic violence survivors that shows a likelihood of torture if they are returned to their designated country of removal. …………………….25
• Police and high-level government officials in Mexico have acquiesced in killings, rapes, and violence against women since at least the mid-1980s. ……………………………………………………………..25
• Internal relocation in Mexico is unsafe for domestic violence survivors like Perez………………………………………………………………31

Rosen v. Ming Dai and Rosen v. Alcaraz (January 11 2021) Supreme Court of the United States. NIWAP assisted Jenner & Block LLP in developing and securing social science support in a brief filed to the Supreme Court of the United States on the describing the scientific research about how trauma affects the credibility of testimony. The brief explained the impact of trauma on memory and ability to testify, other mental health conditions’ impact on memory and credibility, and credibility compared to truth.

Topics Addressed in this Amicus Brief:

• Credibility Appraisals Are Central To Asylum Proceedings ……………………………………… 5
• Credibility Determinations In Asylum Cases Are Intertwined With The Effects Of Trauma …… 7
• Trauma Can Manifest As Inconsistent Or Incomplete Memories ……………………………………… 9
• Trauma Can Affect Demeanor ………………………. 15
• The Asylum Process Itself Sharpens Trauma’s Effects …………………………………………… 17
• Immigration Judges Are Far Better Suited Than Appellate Judges To Assess Credibility
  Combined With The Effects Of Trauma ……………. 20
• Congress Properly Vested Immigration Judges, Not Appellate Courts, With The Responsibility For Making Difficult Credibility Determinations ……………………………. 21
• Immigration Judges Have Rightfully Given Asylum To Applicants Whose Testimony May Not Comport With Traditional Indicia Of Credibility Because Of Trauma ………………… 24
• Precluding Federal Appellate Courts From Making Their Own Adverse Credibility
• Findings Will Not Yield Adverse Effects …………. 27