The Board of Immigration Appeals has abandoned its prior “rogue official” formulation for Convention Against Torture claims, and refocused on whether an official was acting under color of law when inflicting torture. “An act that is motivated by personal objectives may be under color of law when the actor uses his or her official authority to further those objectives.” “[I]t is key to consider whether he or she was only able to accomplish the acts of torture by virtue of holding official status. In evaluating if a public official acted under color of law, circuit courts have often relied on whether the actor’s government connections provided physical access to the victim, or to the victim’s whereabouts or other identifying information.” “Also relevant to, but not dispositive of, the ‘under color of law’ analysis is whether a law enforcement officer was on duty and in official uniform at the time of the torturous conduct.” “Another relevant consideration in determining whether an official’s conduct is under color of law is whether the official threatened and had the ability to retaliate through governmental channels if the victim reported the conduct to authorities.”
The full text of Matter of J-G-R- can be found here: