9th Cir.

Vargas-De Campos, Et Al. v. Blanche

July 14, 2026 ·25-2279 ·Unpublished · By Raj Patel

The Ninth Circuit denied a petition for review challenging the dismissal of asylum and withholding of removal claims by the Board of Immigration Appeals. The court found that gang threats separated by months lacked the specificity required to constitute persecution or a well-founded fear of future harm.

Listen to this decision 0:00 / 1:29

Background

Petitioners, natives of El Salvador, sought asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture after gang members threatened them on two separate occasions. The Immigration Judge denied their claims, and the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed their appeal.

The court’s reasoning

The court reviewed the agency’s findings for substantial evidence. It concluded that the two gang threats were separated by months, lacked specificity, and were not followed up, failing to constitute past persecution. For future persecution, the court found no evidence that the gang had a continuing interest in the petitioners, rendering their fear not objectively reasonable. Regarding the Convention Against Torture, the court held that the threats did not meet the high threshold for torture, and generalized government ineffectiveness did not establish acquiescence.

What it means going forward

The petition for review is denied, leaving the Board of Immigration Appeals’ dismissal of the asylum and Convention Against Torture claims in place.