Case Explained: CRUZ MATAS V. BLANCHE

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-07-30 The ninth-circuit denied the petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision affirming an Immigration Judge’s denial of a judicial competency hearing. The court held that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in finding insufficient indicia of incompetency under *Matter of M-A-M-*, 25 I&N Dec. 474 (BIA 2011). Applying the standard that serious mental illness does not automatically equate to a lack of competency, the court noted that while Cruz Matas suffered from anxiety and depression, these conditions did not prevent meaningful participation in proceedings, unlike cases involving hallucinations or psychotic features. The court further found that the IJ properly relied on recent medical records and Cruz Matas’s demonstrated ability to represent himself, distinguishing the case from prior remands where outdated records were used or speech patterns indicated disorganized thought. Additionally, the court rejected arguments regarding the *Franco-Gonzalez* injunction, concluding that the IJ did not err in relying on a mental health evaluation that showed no signs of mania or suicidal ideation, and found no due process violation from translation pauses because Cruz Matas failed to demonstrate that better translation would have likely changed the outcome. The petition for review was denied, and the motion to stay removal was denied as moot. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.