Lexplug logoLexplug

Sanchez-Trujillo v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
801 F.2d 1571 (1986)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

To qualify for asylum or prohibition of deportation based on membership in a 'particular social group,' an applicant must demonstrate that the group is more than a broad demographic category and is defined by a common, immutable characteristic or a voluntary associational relationship that imparts a shared identity.


Facts:

  • Luis Alonzo Sanchez-Trujillo and Luis Armando Escobar-Nieto are citizens of El Salvador who entered the United States without inspection.
  • While in El Salvador, Sanchez-Trujillo was a member of a Catholic youth organization; the priest leading the group once disappeared for a month and returned with bruises.
  • On four occasions, Sanchez-Trujillo was briefly detained and searched by government security forces at bus stops, but he was never arrested or harmed.
  • Escobar-Nieto was once attacked at night, beaten, and robbed by men in a van with government license plates in San Salvador.
  • Escobar-Nieto was present at two large demonstrations that were violently dispersed by security forces, although he was not personally involved in the violence.
  • After entering the U.S., Sanchez-Trujillo participated in demonstrations protesting conditions in El Salvador.
  • Both men claimed they feared persecution if returned to El Salvador due to their status as young, urban, working-class males who had not served in the Salvadoran military.

Procedural Posture:

  • The Immigration & Naturalization Service (INS) initiated deportation proceedings against Sanchez-Trujillo and Escobar-Nieto.
  • At a joint hearing before an Immigration Judge (IJ), the petitioners conceded deportability but applied for asylum and prohibition of deportation.
  • The Immigration Judge denied the applications, finding their proposed class did not constitute a cognizable 'social group' and their individual claims were insufficient.
  • The petitioners appealed the IJ's decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).
  • The BIA affirmed the Immigration Judge's decision, denying the petitioners' claims for relief.
  • Sanchez-Trujillo and Escobar-Nieto, the petitioners, filed a petition for review of the BIA's final order in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Locked

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 classification of 'young, urban, working class males of military age who have not served in the military' constitute a 'particular social group' for the purposes of qualifying for asylum or prohibition of deportation under the Immigration and Nationality Act?


Opinions:

Majority - Beezer, Circuit Judge

No. The classification of 'young, urban, working class males' is not a 'particular social group' under the immigration statutes. The court reasoned that the statutory phrase implies a collection of people closely affiliated by a common impulse, interest, or voluntary associational relationship that is fundamental to their identity. The proposed group is a sweeping demographic division encompassing individuals with diverse lifestyles, interests, and political leanings, not a cohesive, homogeneous group. Recognizing such a broad category would be tantamount to extending refugee status to any person displaced by general conditions of unrest, which is beyond the scope of the Refugee Act. The court also found the petitioners' individual experiences, such as random detentions or a single robbery, were indicative of the general dangers of a war-torn country rather than targeted persecution on account of a protected ground.



Analysis:

This decision significantly narrowed the definition of a 'particular social group' in the Ninth Circuit, establishing a higher bar for asylum applicants basing their claims on group membership. It moved the analysis away from broad demographic categories facing generalized violence toward a requirement for cohesion, homogeneity, and a fundamental shared identity. The case serves as a key precedent for denying asylum claims that are based on widespread civil strife rather than persecution targeted at a specific, cognizable group. Future courts would rely on this framework to distinguish between generalized risk and persecution on account of one of the five protected statutory grounds.

🤖 Gunnerbot:
Query Sanchez-Trujillo v. Immigration and Naturalization Service (1986) directly. You can ask questions about any aspect of the case. If it's in the case, Gunnerbot will know.
Locked
Subscribe to Lexplug to chat with the Gunnerbot about this case.

Unlock the full brief for Sanchez-Trujillo v. Immigration and Naturalization Service