Matter Of A-B-

27 I. & N. Dec. 316 (2018)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

A-B- (P) is a native and citizen of El Salvador. P entered the United States illegally and was apprehended by U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents in July 2014. After being placed in removal proceedings, P filed an application for asylum and withholding of removal under Section 1231(b)(3), and for withholding of removal under the regulations implementing the United Nations Convention Against Torture. P claimed she was persecuted on account of her membership in the purported particular social group of 'El Salvadoran women who are unable to leave their domestic relationships where they have children in common' with their partners. P claimed that her ex-husband, with whom she shares three children, repeatedly abused her physically, emotionally, and sexually during and after their marriage. The immigration judge denied all relief and ordered P removed to El Salvador. The judge had four reasons: (1) the respondent was not credible; (2) the group in which she claimed membership did not qualify as a 'particular social group' within the meaning of 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A); (3) even if it did, P failed to establish that her membership in a social group was a central reason for her persecution; and (4) she failed to show that the El Salvadoran government was unable or unwilling to help her. P appealed. The Board reversed and remanded with an order to grant Pt asylum after the completion of background checks. It found that P's particular social group was substantially similar to 'married women in Guatemala who are unable to leave their relationship,' which the Board had recognized in Matter of A-R-C-G-. The immigration judge issued an order purporting to certify and administratively return the matter to the Board in light of intervening developments in the law. Several courts of appeals had recently held that domestic-violence victims failed to prove their entitlement to asylum based on membership in particular social groups. The Attorney General took the case for review.