Case Explained: MARTINEZ ZARATE V. BLANCHE

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-25 The Ninth Circuit denied the petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order denying Jorge Martinez Zarate’s applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The court applied a substantial evidence standard to the agency’s factual findings and de novo review to questions of law. The court held that substantial evidence supports the agency’s determinations that Martinez Zarate failed to demonstrate harm rising to the level of persecution or a clear probability of future persecution based on his ethnicity, political opinion, or former military service, noting that persecution due to current or former membership in a police force or military is not on account of a particular social group. Additionally, the court found substantial evidence supporting the denial of CAT protection because Martinez Zarate failed to show it was more likely than not that he would be tortured by or with the acquiescence of the Mexican government upon return. As a practical consequence, the petition for review is denied, and the temporary stay of removal is lifted while the motion to stay removal is denied, allowing for his removal from the United States. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.