Background
Petitioners, including Gladis Hernandez-De Cornejo and her minor children, sought review of Board of Immigration Appeals decisions denying their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The underlying claims arose from alleged past persecution and fear of future persecution due to an abusive marriage and gender-based violence in El Salvador. The petitioners also challenged the denial of a motion to reopen proceedings and asserted an ineffective assistance of counsel claim.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed the Board of Immigration Appeals decisions under the substantial-evidence standard. It found that the agency’s conclusion that the Salvadoran government was able and willing to protect the petitioner was supported by uncontroverted facts showing the government assisted her 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 this specific evidence. Regarding the Convention Against Torture claim, the court found no evidence that the government would acquiesce in torture or that the abuse constituted torture. The ineffective assistance of counsel claim failed because the petitioner could not show prejudice. Finally, the motion to reopen was properly denied as the evidence did not constitute a material change in country conditions or establish a prima facie case for relief.
What it means going forward
The denial of the petition lifts the temporary stay of removal, allowing the government to proceed with the removal of the petitioners to El Salvador.