Albathani v. INS

How later courts describe this case

• holding that the BIA’s “affirmance without opinion” procedure does not violate due process
• holding that, so long as a rational basis was set forth in some stage of agency proceedings, the BIA may affirm IJ decisions without an opinion
• stating that an unadmitted alien present in the United States has only "limited" due process rights
• noting that Chenery only requires the relevant agency, here the INS, to give reasons for its decisions, which may issue from either the BIA or an IJ
• noting that “[t]he summary affirmance scheme does create ... problems [for review], but they do not render the scheme a violation of due process or render judicial review impossible”
• suggesting that summary affirmance by the BIA does not “establish that the required review is not taking place”
• “[I]f the BIA does not independently state a correct ground for affirmance in a case in which the reasoning proffered by the IJ is faulty, the BIA risks reversal on appeal.”
• the two alleged incidents of persecution “may well have been, as the IJ suggested, nothing more than the robbery of someone driving a Mercedes with cash in his pocket”