Summary
The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied Marco Danilo Santos Garcia's petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals decision affirming the denial of asylum and withholding of removal. The court held that substantial evidence supported the findings that threats and an assault by Lider Party members did not amount to past persecution, lacked the required nexus to a protected political opinion, and did not establish a well-founded fear of future persecution. The court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction an unexhausted claim based on Indigenous Mam identity.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the threats, attempted extortion, and minor physical assault established past persecution for purposes of asylum and withholding of removal.
- Whether Santos's mistreatment was motivated, at least in part, by his political opinion or FCN Party affiliation.
- Whether Santos established a well-founded fear of future persecution or was entitled to a presumption of future persecution.
- Whether the First Circuit had jurisdiction to review a particular-social-group claim that was not presented to the BIA.
- Whether substantial evidence supported the BIA's denial of asylum and withholding of removal.
Holdings
- The court lacked jurisdiction to review Santos's claim that he faced persecution as an Indigenous Guatemalan male of Mam descent because he failed to raise that claim before the BIA.
- The threats, attempted extortion, and physical assault described by Santos did not compel a finding of past persecution.
- Santos did not establish that his political opinion or FCN Party affiliation was at least one central reason for the harm he experienced.
- Because Santos did not establish past persecution on account of a protected ground, he was not entitled to a presumption of future persecution, and the record did not establish an independent well-founded fear of future persecution.
- The court denied the petition because substantial evidence supported the BIA's determination that Santos had not shown past or future persecution on account of his political opinion.
Key quotations
“Persecution goes beyond "unpleasantness, harassment, and even basic suffering."” (at 10)
“As the IJ found, what was involved was an attempt, not motivated by his FCN affiliation, to extort money from Santos and was nothing more than garden variety extortion.” (at 11)
“Santos's petition for review is dismissed in part and denied in part.” (at 13)
Factual background
Santos, a Guatemalan citizen, testified that members of the Lider Party threatened him three times in March and April 2016 while demanding money, including one incident involving a brief physical assault and another involving a weapon. He attributed the threats to his support for the FCN political party, but testified that he was not seriously injured, did not seek medical treatment, and had no information that the individuals continued to seek him. The Lider Party had been dissolved, and the FCN Party had won the 2015 presidential election.
Procedural history
Santos conceded removability and applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture protection. After a merits hearing, the immigration judge denied relief, finding that the threats and assault did not constitute past persecution, lacked a nexus to a protected ground, and did not establish a likelihood of future persecution or torture. The BIA affirmed on June 21, 2022. The First Circuit dismissed for lack of jurisdiction an unexhausted particular-social-group claim raised on appeal and denied the petition as to the preserved asylum and withholding claims.