Case Explained: HERRERA, ET AL. V. BLANCHE

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-05 The Ninth Circuit denied the petition for review filed by Valentin Herrera and Teresa Najera regarding the Board of Immigration Appeals’ denial of their motion to reopen. The court applied an abuse of discretion standard of review under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, upholding the BIA’s conclusion that the Petitioners failed to establish prima facie eligibility for asylum, withholding of removal, or protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The court reasoned that the Petitioners’ claims relied on general conditions of crime and violence in Mexico rather than specific evidence of persecution on account of a protected ground. Citing *Zetino v. Holder* and related precedent, the court found that their fear of harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random gang violence lacks the required nexus to a protected ground. Furthermore, the court determined that the Petitioners’ affidavits were too speculative to demonstrate a risk of persecution based on family ties, land ownership, or disability, and failed to provide specific evidence showing it is more likely than not they would be tortured if removed to Mexico. As a practical consequence, the petition was denied, and the court lifted the temporary stay of removal that had been entered pursuant to General Order 6.4(c), effective immediately. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.