最高法院规定,联邦上诉法院必须遵从移民法官对庇护案件的事实裁定。 Supreme Court rules federal appeals courts must defer to immigration judges' factual findings in asylum cases.

美国最高法院一致裁定,联邦上诉法院必须遵从移民法官对庇护案件的事实调查结果,适用《移民和国籍法》下的“实质性证据”标准。 The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that federal appeals courts must defer to immigration judges' factual findings in asylum cases, applying the "substantial evidence" standard under the Immigration and Nationality Act. 这项裁决由Ketanji Brown Jackson法官撰写,加强了行政部门在移民事务方面的权力,限制司法审查,要求法院维持移民法官的裁定,除非他们得不到大力支持。 The decision, written by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, reinforces the executive branch's authority in immigration matters by limiting judicial review and requiring courts to uphold immigration judges' determinations unless they lack substantial support. 该案涉及一个萨尔瓦多家庭,该家庭声称因死亡威胁而受到迫害,但被拒绝庇护,法院确认其指控不符合受迫害的法律门槛。 The case involved a Salvadoran family who claimed persecution due to death threats but were denied asylum, with the Court affirming that their allegations did not meet the legal threshold for persecution. 预计这项裁决将简化庇护上诉程序,减少拖延,使申请人更难推翻拒绝申请,从而强化行政服从的长期先例。 The ruling is expected to streamline asylum appeals, reduce delays, and make it harder for applicants to overturn denials, reinforcing longstanding precedent on administrative deference.