## Facts

- Li Wu Lin, a citizen of the People’s Republic of China, entered the United States in October 1992 and conceded deportability.
- Lin applied for asylum and withholding of deportation, alleging persecution risk based on political opinion.
- In spring 1989, at age 15 in Fujian Province, Lin participated in multiple pro-democracy demonstrations criticizing government corruption, undemocratic rule, and human-rights abuses.
- Lin was placed at the front of at least two demonstrations, holding protest signs and wearing a headband demanding freedom.
- At a May 25, 1989 demonstration, police and soldiers blocked access to a county government building and beat students with electric batons when they tried to push forward.
- After the June 4, 1989 Tiananmen crackdown, police and a local leader came to Lin’s parents’ home on June 10, 1989 demanding that Lin present himself for interrogation.
- Lin went into hiding for approximately two and a half years; officials returned to his parents’ home about five times seeking him and warned he would be in “serious trouble” if caught.
- Lin learned that other student participants were arrested, beaten, and sentenced to hard labor.

## Issues

1. Whether substantial evidence supported the BIA’s finding that Lin lacked a well-founded fear of persecution on account of political opinion.
2. Whether the BIA erred by treating the government’s interest as ordinary law enforcement for “trespass on government property,” rather than politically motivated targeting.
3. Whether the withholding-of-deportation claim required reconsideration if the asylum analysis was legally or factually flawed.

## Decision

- The Third Circuit granted the petition for review in part and remanded.
- Because the BIA found Lin credible, the court treated Lin’s account as established for review.
- The court held the record did not substantially support the BIA’s conclusion that the authorities’ interest was merely nonpolitical “trespass.”
- The court concluded the evidence compelled the finding that Lin had a well-founded fear of persecution on account of political opinion.
- The court did not order withholding granted, but directed the agency to reassess both asylum and withholding on remand under the proper analysis.

## Legal Principles

- Under substantial-evidence review, a reviewing court must uphold the BIA unless the record evidence compels a contrary conclusion.
- A well-founded fear of persecution requires both a genuine subjective fear and an objectively reasonable basis for that fear.
- In assessing motive for persecution, adjudicators must look to the actual reasons for government action and the surrounding political context, not merely the formal criminal label asserted.
- Punishment framed as prosecution may constitute persecution when it is used to target political dissent or otherwise impose politically motivated harm.
- Withholding of deportation requires a higher likelihood of persecution than asylum; when the asylum analysis is flawed, withholding generally must be reconsidered as well.

## Conclusion

The Third Circuit vacated the agency’s denial to the extent it rested on a “trespass” characterization unsupported by the record and remanded for reconsideration, holding that Lin’s credible testimony and the post-crackdown targeting compelled the conclusion that his fear of political persecution was well founded.


Lin v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 238 F.3d 239 (3d Cir. 2001)