CA9 on Burden of Proof: Romero v. Garland

Romero v. Garland

"Romero had been admitted before he applied for adjustment of status. Thus, he is not now an “applicant for admission,” and therefore the “clearly and beyond doubt” burden does not apply. Rather, the “preponderance of the evidence” burden from 8 C.F.R. § 1240.8(d) applies. ...  [W]e remand for the BIA to reconsider whether Romero met his burden to show by a “preponderance of the evidence” under 8 C.F.R. § 1240.8(d) that he was not inadmissible."

[Hats off to Luther Snavely and Reza Athari!]