Case Explained: FRANCO-PRADA, ET AL. V. BLANCHE

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-10 The ninth-circuit denied the petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing the appeal of an immigration judge’s denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The court applied the substantial evidence standard to review the Agency’s factual findings, noting that where the BIA cites Matter of Burbano without disagreement with the IJ, it reviews the IJ’s decision as its own. Regarding asylum and withholding of removal, the court held that the petitioners failed to meet their burden of showing the Colombian government is unable or unwilling to protect them from the private actor group “Front 53.” The record contained no evidence that Front 53 members are government officials or that the government cannot control them; furthermore, country conditions evidence indicated the government actively combats extortionist groups. The court rejected the petitioners’ claim that the Agency ignored evidence regarding the group’s nature because they failed to identify any specific evidence in the record. Regarding CAT protection, the court found substantial evidence supported the denial because the record did not compel a conclusion that the petitioners faced a likelihood of torture by or with the acquiescence of Colombian officials. The court clarified that generalized evidence of violence and crime, or general government ineffectiveness in preventing crime, is insufficient to establish such a likelihood. As a practical consequence, the petition for review is denied, and the petitioners’ opposed motion to stay removal is also denied. Consequently, the temporary stay of removal entered pursuant to General Order 6.4(c) is lifted effective immediately, allowing for the enforcement of the removal order. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.