Case Explained: BLANCO CARDONA, ET AL. V. BLANCHE

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-11 The ninth-circuit denied the petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order denying asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Applying the substantial evidence standard of review under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, the court held that the Agency’s findings were supported by the record in three key areas. First, the court found sufficient evidence to support the conclusion that the Lead Petitioner did not suffer past persecution, noting that while she was harassed and threatened by parents of special-needs children she transported, these incidents involved no physical harm and did not rise to the level of persecution. Second, the court affirmed that the Agency’s determination that the petitioners failed to demonstrate a well-founded fear of future persecution was supported by substantial evidence, as there was no contact with the threatening parties after the employment ended in December 2022 and no indication of a continuing interest in harming the family. Additionally, the court upheld the finding that the petitioners could safely relocate within Colombia, as they failed to show targeted persecution beyond generalized violence. Third, the court determined that substantial evidence supported the denial of CAT relief because the petitioners failed to demonstrate a particularized likelihood of torture by or with the acquiescence of Colombian officials. Consequently, the petition is denied, and the temporary stay of removal entered pursuant to General Order 6.4(c) is lifted effective immediately. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.