Case Explained: Astrid Lucero Matias-Pablo; E.J.E.V.M v. Todd Blanche, Attorney General of the United States

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-14 The eighth-circuit denied the petition for review filed by Astrid Lucero Matias-Pablo and her minor son seeking asylum, statutory withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The court applied the substantial evidence standard of review to the Board of Immigration Appeals’ factual findings, requiring the petitioners to demonstrate that the evidence not only supports a contrary conclusion but compels it. Regarding asylum and withholding of removal, the court held that Matias-Pablo failed to establish the required nexus between her persecution and her membership in the proposed particular social groups of “Guatemalan females” or “Guatemalan females without protection.” The court reasoned that while domestic violence can qualify for asylum if motivated by a protected ground, the record demonstrated that her abuser was a generally violent individual whose actions were driven by substance abuse, jealousy, and paranoia rather than her status as a Guatemalan female. Consequently, the court found that her membership in the proposed social groups was merely incidental or tangential to the persecution, failing to meet the “one central reason” test required under 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(A). Regarding the CAT claim, the court denied relief because Matias-Pablo failed to show that it is more likely than not she would be tortured by or with the acquiescence of the Guatemalan government if removed. The court noted that while there was evidence of domestic violence in Guatemala, the record also showed significant government efforts to combat such violence, including specialized courts and victim service centers, which established that the government did not acquiesce in torture. The practical consequence is that the petition for review is denied, and the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order affirming the final removal against Matias-Pablo and her son remains in effect. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.