Antonio A. Gonzalez v. U.S. Attorney General
820 F.3d 399
| 11th Cir. | 2016Background
- Antonio Gonzalez, a Honduran national and former Mara-18 gang member, entered the U.S. in 1997 and was later charged as removable for unlawful presence and a controlled-substance conviction (guilty plea to possession with intent to sell).
- Gonzalez applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection, asserting a fear of persecution/torture in Honduras as a former Mara-18 member who would be targeted by Mara-18, MS-13, and corrupt Honduran officials.
- He had joined Mara-18 as a teenager, received a gang-specific tattoo, committed gang-related crimes under coercion, left after serious violence, and retained the tattoo.
- The IJ denied relief (asylum time-barred; withholding denied based on alleged serious nonpolitical crime and failure to show membership in a cognizable "particular social group"; CAT relief denied). Gonzalez did not contest the asylum timeliness ruling.
- The BIA affirmed, relying on precedential BIA decisions (Matter of E-A-G- and Matter of W-G-R-) that (1) gang membership/former membership cannot form a particular social group and (2) the proposed group lacked the required particularity; it also affirmed denial of CAT relief.
- The Eleventh Circuit reviewed the BIA decision (legal questions de novo, factual findings for CAT constrained by jurisdictional bars) and denied Gonzalez’s petition.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether former Mara-18 members constitute a "particular social group" for withholding of removal | Gonzalez: former gang membership is immutable and places him at risk; qualifies as a particular social group | Government: BIA precedent holds gang membership (current or former) and the proposed group lack the requisite particularity and cannot form a protected group | Held for government; BIA’s interpretation reasonable and entitled to Chevron deference — former gang membership not a cognizable particular social group |
| Whether Gonzalez met the BIA’s "particularity" and "social distinction" requirements | Gonzalez: the group is definable (tattoos, names, family ties, appearance) and socially distinct in Honduras | Government: group is overbroad, diffuse, and subjective per Matter of W-G-R-; would include many with varying involvement | Held for government; proposed group fails the particularity requirement |
| Whether the BIA’s interpretation of "particular social group" is entitled to deference | Gonzalez: other circuits have found former gang membership can qualify; BIA’s stance is incorrect | Government: BIA precedent is a permissible construction of an ambiguous statutory term and merits Chevron deference | Held for government; Eleventh Circuit applies Chevron and upholds BIA interpretations |
| Whether Gonzalez is eligible for CAT relief given his controlled-substance conviction | Gonzalez: evidence shows likely torture with state acquiescence if returned | Government: removal is based on a controlled-substance conviction which limits judicial review of factual findings | Held for government; court lacks jurisdiction to review factual CAT claim due to statutory bar for aliens removable for controlled-substance offenses |
Key Cases Cited
- Kazemzadeh v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 577 F.3d 1341 (11th Cir.) (establishes review scope of BIA decisions)
- Castillo-Arias v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 446 F.3d 1190 (11th Cir.) (BIA interpretations of ambiguous INA terms entitled to Chevron deference)
- INS v. Aguirre-Aguirre, 526 U.S. 415 (U.S.) (BIA case-by-case interpretations of INA ambiguous terms get deference)
- Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (U.S.) (framework for judicial deference to agency statutory interpretations)
- Quinchia v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 552 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir.) (single-member BIA decisions relying on precedents can receive Chevron deference)
- Urbina-Mejia v. Holder, 597 F.3d 360 (6th Cir.) (former gang membership can be immutable; addresses Acosta immutability analysis)
- Martinez v. Holder, 740 F.3d 902 (4th Cir.) (analyzes former gang-membership claims and BIA deference issues)
- Benitez Ramos v. Holder, 589 F.3d 426 (7th Cir.) (addressing whether former gang membership can constitute a particular social group)
- Cantarero v. Holder, 734 F.3d 82 (1st Cir.) (upholds BIA’s determination regarding former Mara-18 members and Chevron deference)