The Second Circuit has again cast doubt on the reliability of border interviews in a credibility determination. The court reiterated that “a border interview record is “‘inherently less reliable’ if (1) the record ‘merely summarizes or paraphrases the [noncitizen’s] statements’ rather than include ‘a verbatim account or transcript,” (2) “the questions asked are not designed to elicit the details of an asylum claim, or the . . . officer fails to ask follow-up questions that would aid the [noncitizen] in developing his or her account,’ (3) ‘the [noncitizen] appears to have been reluctant to reveal information to INS officials because of prior interrogation sessions or other coercive experiences in his or her home country,’ or (4) ‘the [noncitizen’s] answers to the questions posed suggest that the [noncitizen] did not understand English or the translations provided by the interpreter.’” An IJ is required to consider these factors before relying on a border interview for an adverse credibility determination if the record indicates the factors may be relevant.
The full text of Pomavilla-Zaruma v. Garland can be found here: https://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/e263f00e-d425-4546-a54b-58a3fa367add/10/doc/20-3230_opn.pdf#xml=https://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/e263f00e-d425-4546-a54b-58a3fa367add/10/hilite/