Case Explained: BOJAN ANDRIC v. TODD W. BLANCHE, Acting Attorney General of the United States

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit Filed: 2026-07-01 The Seventh Circuit denied Bojan Andric’s petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal. The court affirmed the agency’s decision, holding that Andric failed to establish a nexus between the harm he suffered and a statutorily protected ground under the Immigration and Nationality Act. Specifically, the court ruled that the proposed social groups—either “Serbian soccer players who are victims of violence from soccer hooligans” or “former soccer players in Serbia”—were not cognizable because membership in these groups was not an immutable characteristic fundamental to identity; rather, the persecution stemmed from personal grievances regarding Andric’s individual on-field performance and high pay. Additionally, the court found that Andric waived his claim of imputed political opinion by failing to address it substantively in his appellate brief, and noted that the hooligans’ actions were motivated by dissatisfaction with his play rather than an imputed anti-hooligan stance. While the court acknowledged concerns regarding the Immigration Judge’s use of a separate “Addendum of Law” which complicated reasoned decision-making review, it declined to remand on procedural grounds because the outcome would remain unchanged regardless of whether the legal bridge was more explicitly articulated. Consequently, Andric remains subject to removal proceedings as his asylum claim lacks a valid basis under federal law. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.