A-R-C-G
26 I & N Dec. 388 (2014)
Rule of Law:
Married women in Guatemala who are unable to leave their relationship can constitute a cognizable 'particular social group' for asylum purposes when the group is defined with particularity, socially distinct, and based on immutable characteristics.
Facts:
- The respondent, a native of Guatemala, married her husband at the age of 17.
- Throughout the marriage, the respondent's husband subjected her to severe physical and sexual abuse, including breaking her nose, burning her breast with paint thinner, and raping her.
- The respondent contacted the Guatemalan police multiple times for assistance, but they refused to intervene, stating they would not interfere in a marital relationship.
- The husband threatened to kill the respondent if she contacted the police again or attempted to leave him.
- The respondent attempted to leave the relationship by moving in with her father and later moving to Guatemala City, but her husband located her and forced her to return through threats of death.
- Fearing for her life if she remained in Guatemala, the respondent fled the country and entered the United States.
Procedural Posture:
- The Department of Homeland Security initiated removal proceedings against the respondents.
- The respondent filed an application for asylum and withholding of removal.
- The Immigration Judge found the respondents removable and denied the applications, ruling that the abuse was comprised of arbitrary criminal acts rather than persecution.
- The respondent appealed the denial of relief to the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the group defined as 'married women in Guatemala who are unable to leave their relationship' constitute a cognizable particular social group eligible for asylum or withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act?
Opinions:
Majority - Adkins-Blanch
Yes, the Board finds that 'married women in Guatemala who are unable to leave their relationship' constitutes a valid particular social group for asylum purposes. The Board reasoned that this group satisfies the three-part test required for a particular social group. First, the members share common immutable characteristics: gender and marital status within a relationship they cannot leave due to societal, religious, or legal constraints. Second, the group is defined with particularity because the terms 'married,' 'women,' and 'unable to leave' have clear social definitions in Guatemala. Third, the group is socially distinct because Guatemalan society recognizes the existence of this population, evidenced by the culture of 'machismo' and the refusal of police to enforce domestic violence laws. The Board noted that the Department of Homeland Security conceded these points.
Analysis:
This decision was a landmark ruling in immigration law because it formally recognized that victims of domestic violence could qualify for asylum based on their membership in a particular social group. Previously, domestic violence was often treated solely as a private criminal matter rather than a basis for refugee protection. By acknowledging that a woman's inability to leave a marriage—due to cultural, legal, or religious constraints—can define a protected group, the Board expanded the scope of asylum eligibility for women in countries with systemic gender-based violence and ineffective state protection.
