Background
Gladis Hernandez-De Cornejo, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitioned for review of two Board of Immigration Appeals decisions. The first decision dismissed her appeal of an Immigration Judge’s denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The second decision denied her motion to reopen the proceedings. Her claims were based on past and feared future persecution arising from an abusive marriage and gender-based violence in El Salvador.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed the asylum and withholding claims under the substantial-evidence standard. It found the agency’s decision supported by evidence that the Salvadoran government had assisted the petitioner in leaving her abusive marriage and obtaining a restraining order. The court held that general country-level information on gender-based violence was insufficient to contradict specific evidence of government assistance. Regarding the Convention Against Torture claim, the court found no evidence that the government would acquiesce in torture or that the husband’s abuse constituted torture. The ineffective assistance of counsel claim failed because the petitioner could not show prejudice. The motion to reopen was denied because the evidence presented was either untimely, not materially different from prior evidence, or insufficient to establish a prima facie case for relief.
What it means going forward
The petition for review is denied, and the temporary stay of removal is lifted. The petitioner remains subject to removal proceedings as determined by the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download