The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently ruled against Hayatullah Zahid, an Afghan asylum seeker, in his petitions for protection from torture under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The court's decision, issued on October 20, 2026, affects Zahid and others in similar situations, highlighting the challenges faced by Afghan refugees under Taliban rule.
Zahid fled Afghanistan after the Taliban regained control in 2021. He argued that returning to Afghanistan would likely result in torture due to his past actions against the Taliban. The court's ruling emphasizes the stringent requirements for CAT protection and the difficulties asylum seekers face in proving their claims.
Background
Hayatullah Zahid, a native of Afghanistan, worked for the Ministry of Education before the Taliban's return to power. He supervised the education department in Paktia Province. Following the Taliban's takeover, he was pressured to provide information about female students and their families, which he did for a short time. In September 2022, Zahid participated in a protest against the Taliban's closure of girls' schools. After sharing images and videos of the protest, he was arrested and beaten by Taliban officials.
After leaving Afghanistan in October 2023, Zahid entered the United States in February 2024. He was served with a Notice to Appear, which charged him with being inadmissible due to lack of valid entry documents. During his initial hearing, Zahid admitted to unlawful entry and expressed his intent to apply for asylum. He subsequently applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection, citing his mistreatment by the Taliban.
The Ruling
The Fifth Circuit court ruled against Zahid's petitions for review of two decisions made by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). The first decision dismissed Zahid's appeal concerning the denial of CAT relief and declined his request to remand for new evidence consideration. The second decision denied Zahid's request for reconsideration.
The court ruled, "The evidence does not compel a conclusion contrary to the BIA’s denial of CAT protection, and the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying remand or reconsideration."
The judges on the panel included Circuit Judges Jones, Southwick, and Willett. The court found that Zahid's evidence did not meet the high threshold required for CAT relief, which necessitates proof that it is more likely than not that he would be tortured if returned to Afghanistan.
Impact
The court's ruling has significant implications for Zahid and other Afghan refugees seeking asylum in the United States. It underscores the challenges faced by those fleeing Taliban rule, particularly in proving the likelihood of torture upon return. The decision may set a precedent for future cases involving similar claims, making it more difficult for asylum seekers to obtain the protections they seek under CAT.
This ruling may affect not only Zahid but also other individuals from Afghanistan who have faced persecution or violence due to their political beliefs or actions against the Taliban. The stringent standards for CAT protection highlight the complexities of asylum law and the need for compelling evidence to support claims of potential torture.
What's Next
Zahid's legal options appear limited following this ruling. There is no indication that he plans to appeal the decision further, and it remains unclear if there are any related cases pending that could influence his situation. The court's decision emphasizes the high bar that asylum seekers must meet to secure protection from torture in the United States.