Al-Jabari v. U.S. Attorney General

Thaer Al-Jabari, a stateless Palestinian born in Jordan, faced removal proceedings after a Florida conviction for trafficking in cocaine. An immigration judge determined the conviction constituted an aggravated felony, rendering him statutorily ineligible for asylum and withholding of removal. The Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed his appeal and also denied protection under the Convention Against Torture, finding no clear probability of torture in Jordan. Al-Jabari petitioned the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, contesting the classification of his offense and the CAT denial. The per curiam panel upheld the agency’s decision, ruling that the drug trafficking conviction squarely qualified as an aggravated felony, thus barring most forms of relief, and that the factual record supported the denial of CAT protection.

The petition for review was denied. The Eleventh Circuit held that the drug trafficking conviction was an aggravated felony, making Al-Jabari ineligible for asylum and withholding of removal, and that the denial of CAT protection was supported by substantial evidence.

Whether Al-Jabari’s Florida conviction for trafficking in cocaine constituted an aggravated felony, thereby precluding asylum and withholding of removal; and whether substantial evidence supported the denial of deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture.

The ruling reinforced strict immigration penalties for drug trafficking convictions, confirming that such offenses trigger mandatory bars to asylum and withholding of removal. It highlighted the extremely limited avenues for relief available to long-term lawful residents with aggravated felony records and demonstrated the considerable deference appellate courts give to immigration agencies’ factual findings under the substantial evidence standard.