BUESO-AVILA v. Holder, 663 F.3d 934

Bueso-Avila, a Honduran national, sought asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection in the U.S.
He testified that MS-13 gang members attacked and threatened him due to his evangelical Christian church youth group involvement.
The Immigration Judge denied relief; the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed, finding no nexus to religion or social group.
This court remanded for reconsideration after Gatimi v. Holder and Benitez Ramos v. Holder clarified that social visibility is not required to establish membership in a particular social group.
On remand, the Board again denied relief, concluding the harm stemmed from gang recruitment efforts, not religion or group membership.
The Seventh Circuit affirmed, holding substantial evidence supported the Board’s nexus determination and an inference of targeting based on religious factors was not compelled.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether persecution was on account of religion or group	Bueso-Avila argues MS-13 targeted him for religion/group membership.	Board found harm arose from recruitment, not protected grounds.	Not compelled; record supports Board's nexus finding.
Sufficiency of circumstantial evidence for motivation	Evidence shows gang knew of religion and church membership; favorable inferences support motive.	No direct evidence of religious motivation; threats occurred for recruitment.	Record does not compel a finding of religion/group-based persecution.
Standard of review for asylum nexus under substantial evidence	Record demonstrates compelling nexus to religion/group.	Evidence does not show protected-ground nexus; Board reasonably concluded recruitment motive.	Board’s decision upheld under substantial evidence standard.

INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478 (1992) (motive is critical; mere refusal to join a group not enough)
Martinez-Buendia v. Holder, 616 F.3d 711 (7th Cir. 2010) (proof of motive supported when persecutors recognize political stance; evidence of protected-ground nexus)
Gomes v. Gonzales, 473 F.3d 746 (7th Cir. 2007) (substantial evidence of religious persecution)
Jamal-Daoud v. Gonzales, 403 F.3d 918 (7th Cir. 2005) (deferential review; cannot overturn Board merely because different result)
Capric v. Ashcroft, 355 F.3d 1075 (7th Cir. 2004) (highly deferential review; reversal requires compelling evidence)
Gatimi v. Holder, 578 F.3d 611 (7th Cir. 2009) (social visibility not required to establish membership in a particular social group)
Benitez Ramos v. Holder, 589 F.3d 426 (7th Cir. 2009) (reiterates scope of social group and nexus considerations)