N'Diaye v. Barr, No. 18-1135 (8th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this CaseThe Eighth Circuit denied a petition for review of the BIA's decision affirming the IJ's conclusion that petitioner was ineligible for adjustment of status because he had previously provided material support to a terrorist organization. The court held that petitioner failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the material support bar did not apply. In this case, he failed to show that the Movement of Democratic Forces of Casamance (MFDC) he supported was not a terrorist organization, or that he did not know and should not reasonably have known that MFDC was a terrorist organization when he supported it. Finally, collateral estoppel and the law-of-the-case doctrine did not apply because the issue was not previously determined by a valid and final judgment.
Court Description: Melloy, Author, with Benton and Kelly, Circuit Judges] Petition for Review - Immigration. If the evidence before the Immigration Judge indicates that the alien may have materially supported a terrorist organization, he must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the material aid bar does not apply; petitioner failed to show the bar did not apply as his evidence did not show that the organization he supported was not a Tier-III terrorist organization at the time he recruited members and contributed cash; the BIA was correct in determining petitioner failed to meet his burden of proving he did not know or should not have reason to believe the group was a terrorist organization when he supported it; this issue was not decided in petitioner's first immigration proceeding and the doctrines of collateral estoppel and law-of-the-case did not apply.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.