## Facts

- Zainab Ali, an Iraqi Shiite Muslim, fled Iraq with her family due to persecution tied to her father’s political activities and lived in Syria for about a decade.
- The family later obtained refugee status in Denmark, where Ali lived for an extended period and developed ties.
- Ali traveled to the United States to join her husband and remained long enough to lose her Danish refugee status.
- After relatives falsely reported her father was gravely ill, Ali returned to Denmark and was pressured to divorce her husband.
- When she refused, her father and brothers severely beat her; she was hospitalized, and Danish police arrested the father and brothers.
- Ali asked police not to prosecute her brothers and instead to warn them; the police issued warnings and did not pursue prosecution based on her wishes.
- After her brothers were released, one threatened her with a gun; Ali fled again to the United States.
- Ali attempted to enter the United States in 1997 using a false Danish passport; removal proceedings were initiated.
- An immigration judge found her removable, held her ineligible for asylum under the firm-resettlement bar, and denied relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT); the BIA affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether Ali was barred from asylum because she had been firmly resettled in Denmark before attempting to enter the United States.
2. Whether Ali qualified for CAT protection based on a claim that Danish officials “acquiesced” in her family’s abuse by declining to prosecute.

## Decision

- The Sixth Circuit denied the petition for review and affirmed the BIA’s final order.
- The court upheld the finding that Ali was firmly resettled in Denmark, making her ineligible for asylum.
- The court upheld the denial of CAT relief because the record did not show Danish officials consented to or acquiesced in torture.

## Legal Principles

- An applicant is ineligible for asylum if, before arriving in the United States, she was firmly resettled in another country, absent a regulatory exception.
- Firm resettlement is supported by evidence of an offer or grant of refuge or lawful status and the ability to live there with meaningful ties beyond brief transit.
- CAT protection requires showing it is more likely than not the applicant would be tortured in the country of removal, and that the torture would occur with the consent or acquiescence of a public official acting in an official capacity.
- “Acquiescence” requires official awareness of torturous conduct and a breach of a legal duty to intervene; responsive police action and decisions based on the victim’s request generally do not establish acquiescence.

## Conclusion

The Sixth Circuit held Ali was barred from asylum because Denmark had firmly resettled her, and it rejected her CAT claim because Danish police responded to her abuse and their decision not to prosecute was driven by her request, not official consent or deliberate nonintervention.


Ali v. Reno, 237 F.3d 591 (6th Cir. 2001)