Protecting individuals who face torture if removed from the United States. The Convention Against Torture provides critical protection regardless of criminal history — serving as a last resort for those who face the most severe harm. Our attorneys in Albany and the Capital District provide thorough, experienced advocacy for every CAT claim.
The Convention Against Torture (CAT) is an international treaty ratified by the United States that prohibits the return of any person to a country where they would face torture. Under U.S. immigration law, CAT protection is available to individuals who can demonstrate that it is more likely than not that they would be subjected to torture if removed to a particular country. At Mandi Law Group in Albany, our immigration attorneys represent individuals throughout the Capital District and greater New York who face the gravest form of harm — torture — and need the protection that the Convention provides.
Torture under the Convention is defined as the intentional infliction of severe physical or mental pain or suffering by, or at the instigation of, or with the consent or acquiescence of, a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. This definition encompasses a broad range of conduct, including physical violence, sexual assault, prolonged detention under inhumane conditions, and severe psychological abuse. The critical requirement is that the government must be involved — either directly or through acquiescence, which includes willful blindness to torture committed by non-state actors.
CAT protection comes in two forms: withholding of removal under CAT and deferral of removal under CAT. Withholding under CAT provides stronger protection — it cannot be terminated as long as the threat of torture persists, and recipients are eligible for employment authorization. However, withholding under CAT is subject to certain mandatory bars, including the aggravated felony bar. Deferral of removal is available to all applicants regardless of criminal history, but it is more tenuous — it can be terminated if country conditions change and is subject to periodic review by the Immigration Judge.
One of the most significant features of CAT protection is that there are no bars based on criminal history. Unlike asylum and withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act, which can be denied based on aggravated felony convictions or other grounds, CAT protection — particularly deferral of removal — remains available to every individual who can meet the standard of proof. This makes CAT the last resort protection for individuals who face genuine torture risk but are ineligible for all other forms of relief. Our attorneys evaluate every available avenue and pursue the strongest possible case for each client in the Albany and Capital District community.
Convention Against Torture protection is available regardless of your criminal history. If you face torture upon return to your home country, documenting the risk and government involvement is critical to securing protection. Contact our office immediately for a confidential assessment of your CAT claim.
(518) 698-0347Our Convention Against Torture practice covers every aspect of CAT claims, from initial risk assessment through hearing preparation and post-grant protection. Each case is handled with the thoroughness and dedication it demands.
Withholding of removal under the Convention Against Torture provides full CAT protection for individuals who establish that it is more likely than not they would be tortured if returned to their home country. Unlike deferral of removal, withholding under CAT cannot be terminated as long as the threat of torture persists, and the individual cannot be removed to the country of feared torture. Recipients of CAT withholding are eligible for employment authorization and enjoy broader protections than those granted deferral. Our attorneys at Mandi Law Group in Albany prepare thorough applications that document the specific risk of torture, the involvement or acquiescence of government officials, and the country conditions that support each claim, providing clients throughout the Capital District with the strongest possible case for this critical form of protection.
Deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture is a narrower but critically important form of protection available even to individuals who are subject to the mandatory bars that preclude asylum and withholding of removal — including the aggravated felony bar and the persecutor bar. Deferral prevents the government from removing an individual to the specific country where they face torture, but it can be terminated if the Immigration Judge determines that conditions in the country have changed such that the individual is no longer likely to face torture. Deferral is subject to periodic review, and the individual may be removed to a third country. Our attorneys represent clients in the Albany and Capital District area who face these complex situations, building compelling cases that document ongoing torture risk.
The success of a Convention Against Torture claim depends on the strength of the evidence establishing that the applicant is more likely than not to face torture if removed. Our attorneys compile comprehensive country conditions evidence from the U.S. State Department, UNHCR, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and other authoritative sources documenting patterns of torture in the applicant's home country. We work with medical professionals to document physical evidence of past torture, and with psychologists to assess and document the psychological impact of trauma. Expert witnesses who specialize in country conditions and torture patterns provide testimony that contextualizes the applicant's personal risk factors within the broader pattern of government-sponsored or government-tolerated torture.
A central element of any Convention Against Torture claim is proving that the feared torture would be inflicted by, or with the acquiescence of, a public official or person acting in an official capacity. Government acquiescence encompasses not only direct government participation in torture but also situations where government officials demonstrate willful blindness to torture, fail to intervene to prevent torture despite awareness, or are unable or unwilling to control non-governmental actors who engage in torture. Our attorneys at Mandi Law Group gather evidence demonstrating government involvement or complicity, including reports of police or military abuse, evidence of corruption and impunity, documentation of government officials' knowledge of and failure to prevent torture, and expert analysis of the state's capacity and willingness to protect individuals from torture in the Albany and Capital District area clients' home countries.
From your first confidential consultation to securing protection from torture, our attorneys follow a structured process designed to build the strongest possible case and protect your right to remain in the United States.
We begin with a confidential, in-depth consultation to understand your situation, evaluate the specific risks you face if removed to your home country, identify evidence of government involvement or acquiescence in torture, and determine whether CAT withholding or deferral of removal is the appropriate form of protection for your circumstances.
Our attorneys compile comprehensive evidence to support your CAT claim, including country conditions reports documenting torture patterns, medical and psychological evaluations, personal declarations detailing your experiences and fear, and expert reports analyzing government acquiescence and the likelihood of torture upon return to your home country.
We present your Convention Against Torture claim before the Immigration Judge with thorough preparation, compelling testimony, expert witnesses, and comprehensive documentary evidence. Our attorneys anticipate and address challenges to your claim, including arguments about changed country conditions, the specificity of the threat, and the government acquiescence requirement.
Upon securing CAT protection, we assist with obtaining employment authorization, monitoring for any government attempts to terminate protection, responding to periodic reviews in deferral cases, and advising on long-term legal strategies. For clients in the Albany and Capital District area, we remain available to defend your protection status and explore additional avenues of relief.
Last Resort Protection From Torture
Experienced CAT advocacy for clients in Albany and the Capital District
Convention Against Torture claims involve demanding evidentiary standards and complex legal requirements. Understanding these critical considerations strengthens your case and informs your strategy.
Unlike asylum, which can be denied based on certain criminal convictions or other bars, the Convention Against Torture provides protection regardless of an individual's criminal history. Even individuals convicted of aggravated felonies, those subject to the persecutor bar, or those who have been found to pose a danger to the community of the United States remain eligible for CAT protection. This makes CAT the last resort form of protection for individuals who face torture but are barred from all other forms of relief. At minimum, deferral of removal under CAT is available to anyone who can establish the likelihood of torture, making it a critical safety net in the most challenging cases.
The standard of proof for CAT protection requires the applicant to demonstrate that it is more likely than not — meaning a greater than 50% probability — that they would be subjected to torture if removed to the designated country. This is a demanding standard that requires specific, individualized evidence rather than generalized claims about country conditions. The applicant must show that they personally face a particularized risk of torture, considering all relevant evidence including past torture, country conditions, the applicant's profile and activities, and the government's pattern of conduct. Our attorneys build cases that address this standard with precision and thoroughness.
CAT protection requires proof not only that torture is likely but that it would occur with the involvement or acquiescence of the government. This element distinguishes CAT claims from general claims of harm by private actors. Government acquiescence includes direct government participation, government instigation, government consent or agreement, and government willful blindness — situations where officials are aware of torture and fail to intervene. Establishing this element often requires expert testimony on government structures, patterns of impunity, and the state's capacity and willingness to protect individuals from non-state actors who engage in torture.
Understanding the difference between withholding of removal under CAT and deferral of removal under CAT is essential for case strategy. Withholding under CAT provides stronger protection — it cannot be terminated as long as the threat of torture persists, and the individual receives employment authorization. However, withholding is subject to the same mandatory bars as withholding under INA Section 241(b)(3), including the aggravated felony bar. Deferral of removal is available to everyone, regardless of criminal history, but is more tenuous — it can be terminated if country conditions change and is subject to periodic review. Our attorneys evaluate which form of CAT protection to pursue based on each client's specific circumstances.
Answers to some of the most frequently asked questions about Convention Against Torture protection. Every situation is unique — consult with our attorneys for guidance specific to your case.
Under the Convention Against Torture, torture is defined as any act by which severe pain or suffering — whether physical or mental — is intentionally inflicted on a person for purposes such as obtaining information or a confession, punishment, intimidation or coercion, or any reason based on discrimination of any kind. The pain or suffering must be inflicted by, or at the instigation of, or with the consent or acquiescence of, a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. Torture does not include pain or suffering arising from lawful sanctions to the extent consistent with the Convention. This definition is interpreted broadly by U.S. courts to include a wide range of severe mistreatment, including physical violence, sexual assault, prolonged detention under inhumane conditions, and severe psychological abuse.
Yes. One of the most important features of Convention Against Torture protection is that there are no criminal bars to eligibility. Even individuals who have been convicted of aggravated felonies, who are subject to the persecutor bar, or who have been found to be a danger to the community remain eligible for CAT protection. While an aggravated felony conviction bars withholding of removal under CAT, the individual remains eligible for deferral of removal under CAT, which prevents the government from removing them to the country where they face torture. This makes CAT protection the last resort for individuals who face genuine torture risk but are ineligible for asylum or other forms of relief due to their criminal history.
Withholding of removal under CAT and deferral of removal under CAT both protect individuals from being returned to a country where they face torture, but they differ in important ways. Withholding under CAT provides stronger, more durable protection — it cannot be terminated as long as the threat of torture persists, and recipients are eligible for employment authorization. However, withholding under CAT is subject to certain mandatory bars, including the aggravated felony and persecutor bars. Deferral of removal is available to all applicants regardless of criminal history, but it provides more limited protection — it can be terminated if the Immigration Judge determines that country conditions have changed, it is subject to periodic review, and the individual may be removed to a third country where they do not face torture.
Government acquiescence is a key element of any CAT claim. It means that the torture must be inflicted by a government official, at the instigation of a government official, or with the consent or acquiescence of a government official. Acquiescence requires that the official was aware of the torture or was willfully blind to it — meaning the official deliberately ignored evidence that torture was occurring or was likely to occur. This includes situations where the government knows about torture by private actors and fails to intervene, where police or military officials participate in or tolerate torture, where government corruption creates an environment of impunity for torturers, and where the government is unable or unwilling to protect individuals from non-state actors who engage in torture.
Proving the more-likely-than-not standard requires a combination of individualized evidence and country conditions documentation. You must show that you personally face a particularized risk of torture — not merely that torture occurs in your home country generally. Evidence may include your personal history of past torture or abuse by government officials, your political activities or profile that make you a target, country conditions reports documenting systematic torture of individuals in situations similar to yours, expert testimony on the government's pattern of conduct and the likelihood of targeting you specifically, medical and psychological evaluations documenting the effects of past torture, and any threats or evidence of intent to harm you upon return. Our attorneys in Albany work with experts and gather comprehensive evidence to meet this demanding standard.
It depends on the type of CAT protection. Withholding of removal under CAT cannot be terminated as long as the threat of torture persists — the government cannot remove you to the country of feared torture unless it can demonstrate that you no longer face a likelihood of torture. Deferral of removal under CAT, however, is more tenuous. The government can move to terminate deferral by filing a motion with the Immigration Judge arguing that conditions in the country have changed such that you are no longer likely to face torture. The burden is on the government to prove changed circumstances. Deferral cases are subject to periodic review, and our attorneys remain available to defend your protection status at review hearings and respond to any government motions to terminate.
If your Convention Against Torture claim is denied by the Immigration Judge, you have the right to appeal the decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). The appeal must be filed within 30 days of the Immigration Judge's decision. If the BIA also denies your claim, you may petition for review with the federal circuit court of appeals — for cases arising in New York, this is the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Our attorneys at Mandi Law Group handle CAT appeals at all levels, identifying legal errors in the Immigration Judge's decision, briefing the relevant legal standards, and advocating for the reversal of unfavorable decisions. Timely action is critical, as missing the appeal deadline can result in a final order of removal.
Yes, and in fact it is standard practice to assert CAT protection as an alternative form of relief alongside asylum and withholding of removal. Form I-589, the application for asylum and withholding of removal, also serves as the application for Convention Against Torture protection. By asserting all three forms of relief, you preserve every available avenue of protection. If the Immigration Judge denies asylum — for example, due to the one-year filing deadline or a discretionary bar — the court must still consider your claims for withholding of removal and CAT protection. This layered approach ensures that even if the highest form of relief is denied, you may still be protected from removal to a country where you face persecution or torture.
Our asylum and refugee practice covers the full spectrum of humanitarian protection under U.S. immigration law.
Our attorneys provide comprehensive legal services across multiple practice areas.
Helping families stay together through marriage-based green cards, fiance visas, family reunification petitions, and relative sponsorship applications.
Strategic visa solutions for employers and professionals, including H-1B specialty workers, L-1 transfers, EB-5 investors, and PERM labor certification.
Guiding lawful permanent residents through the naturalization process, from application preparation and test readiness to interview coaching and document review.
Aggressive defense for individuals facing removal proceedings, including asylum claims, cancellation of removal, and appeals before immigration courts.
Compassionate representation for individuals seeking protection from persecution, including asylum applications, refugee processing, and CAT protection claims.
Comprehensive immigration compliance solutions for businesses, including I-9 audits, global mobility programs, and immigration policy development.
Experienced advocacy for individuals seeking waivers of inadmissibility, including I-601 hardship waivers, I-601A provisional waivers, and fraud waivers.
Dedicated legal support for crime victims seeking U-visa immigration relief, including certification assistance, application filing, and family derivative petitions.
Skilled appellate representation before the BIA and federal courts, including motions to reopen, motions to reconsider, and appeals of adverse immigration decisions.
Whether you are facing removal and fear torture in your home country, have a criminal history that bars other forms of relief, or need help documenting government acquiescence in torture, our experienced immigration attorneys are here to guide you through every step. Every consultation is confidential and without obligation.