Diaz-Reynoso v. Barr - 968 F.3d 1070 (9th Cir. 2020)

Rule:

The Board of Immigration Appeals' precedent has been premised on the rule that persecutory action taken toward a group can be relevant to that group's social visibility, now social distinction. It is equally clear that the mere mention of persecutory action does not defeat an otherwise cognizable social group. 

Facts:

Sontos Maudilia Diaz-Reynoso, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitioned for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' (BIA) order dismissing her appeal of an Immigration Judge's (IJ) order denying her application for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Diaz-Reynoso sought withholding of removal based on her fear that she would be persecuted in Guatemala on account of her membership in the particular social group of "indigenous women in Guatemala who are unable to leave their relationship." Diaz-Reynoso argued that she is entitled to relief under CAT because, if returned to Guatemala, the Guatemalan government would acquiesce in torture she would suffer at the hands of her husband. On her withholding claim, the BIA concluded that Diaz-Reynoso's proposed particular social group was not cognizable, relying on the Attorney General's decision in Matter of A-B-, 27 I. & N. Dec. 316 (A.G. 2018). With respect to Diaz-Reynoso's CAT claim, the BIA concluded that Diaz-Reynoso failed to establish that the government of Guatemala would acquiesce in any torture she might suffer.

Issue:

Did the BIA err in concluding that this particular social group was not cognizable?

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The court held that remand was required because the BIA erred in concluding that this particular social group was not cognizable. In particular, BIA precedent was premised on the rule that persecutory action taken outward a group could be relevant to that group's social distinction and that the mere mention of persecutory action did not defeat an otherwise cognizable social group. Remand was also required of the alien's CAT claim because failed to consider whether certain community leaders qualified as public officials.