9th Cir.

Galvis-Trujillo v. Blanche

June 12, 2026 ·24-7067 ·Unpublished · By Raj Patel

The Ninth Circuit denied a petition for review challenging an immigration judge's denial of asylum and withholding of removal. The court held that the petitioner's provision of material support to a designated terrorist organization rendered him ineligible for relief under federal law.

Listen to this decision 0:00 / 1:09

Background

Petitioner Jhon Edwar Galvis-Trujillo, a native and citizen of Colombia, sought asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. An Immigration Judge denied these claims, and the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed his appeal. The petitioner argued that the Board incorrectly classified the ELN as a Tier One organization and raised due process challenges regarding the Immigration Judge’s conduct.

The court’s reasoning

The court affirmed that the petitioner is ineligible for asylum because he provided material support to the ELN, which the Secretary of State designated as a Tier One terrorist organization. The court rejected the petitioner’s argument that the Board engaged in impermissible fact-finding, noting that the classification was a legal determination based on the Federal Register. The court also held that the petitioner’s challenge to the Convention Against Torture denial was unexhausted because he failed to challenge the Immigration Judge’s finding on government acquiescence before the Board. Finally, the court found that the petitioner failed to show that the Immigration Judge’s conduct was fundamentally unfair, as there is no knowledge-based exception for Tier One organizations under the statute.

What it means going forward

The decision reinforces the strict application of the material support bar for Tier One terrorist organizations and clarifies that knowledge-based exceptions do not apply to such groups. It also underscores the necessity of exhausting all due process and Convention Against Torture arguments before the Board of Immigration Appeals to preserve them for appellate review.