Gonzalez Aguilar v. Garland, 29 F.4th 1208

Petitioner Kelly Gonzalez Aguilar, a transgender woman from Honduras, alleged childhood abuse by an uncle, later expulsion from school for gender expression, and pervasive countrywide violence against transgender women.
Kelly sought asylum, withholding of removal, and deferral under the Convention Against Torture; the IJ found her credible but denied relief; the BIA dismissed her appeal.
The BIA upheld the IJ’s finding that the uncle’s beatings were not centrally motivated by gender identity and the court held Kelly failed to exhaust a distinct school-expulsion theory.
The IJ and BIA relied in part on Honduran statutes, prosecutions, and limited governmental efforts to investigate crimes against LGBT persons to conclude there was no systemic or pervasive persecution.
The Tenth Circuit concluded the record (country reports, expert declarations, and documentation of killings, impunity, and police involvement) compelled a finding of a pattern or practice of persecution against transgender women in Honduras and granted the petition, remanding for reconsideration of asylum, withholding, and CAT relief.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Past persecution — uncle's abuse	Uncle beatings were motivated by Kelly’s transgender identity	Beatings were due to financial burden, drunkenness, and general brutality; sister abused too	BIA had substantial evidence to deny past-persecution on this basis; affirmed as to that claim
Past persecution — school expulsion (denial of education)	Expulsion for refusing male dress/ haircut amounted to past persecution	Claim was not presented to the BIA; thus not exhausted	Not exhausted on appeal to the BIA; court declined to consider it
Well-founded fear — pattern or practice in Honduras	Country reports, expert testimony, NGO data, and murders/impunity show pervasive violence and police complicity against trans women	Honduran laws, prosecutions, trainings, and added investigators show government efforts to protect LGBT persons	Majority: record compels a finding of a pattern/practice of persecution; BIA erred and asylum eligibility established
Scope of relief on remand	Because asylum eligibility established, BIA must reconsider withholding and CAT relief	BIA originally denied withholding/CAT solely on asylum ineligibility	Case remanded for BIA to reconsider asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT deferral

Dallakoti v. Holder, 619 F.3d 1264 (10th Cir. 2010) (defines "central reason" standard for past persecution)
Woldemeskel v. INS, 257 F.3d 1185 (10th Cir. 2001) (pattern-or-practice requires systemic or pervasive persecution)
INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421 (1987) (well‑founded fear standard; reasonable possibility threshhold)
Bringas-Rodriguez v. Sessions, 850 F.3d 1051 (9th Cir. 2017) (distinguishes de jure protections from de facto enforcement when assessing persecution)
Doe v. Att’y Gen. U.S., 956 F.3d 135 (3d Cir. 2020) (Board erred by failing to find pattern/practice of persecution of LGBT persons)
Bromfield v. Mukasey, 543 F.3d 1071 (9th Cir. 2008) (finding pattern/practice of persecution against gay men in country conditions analysis)
Sarr v. Gonzales, 474 F.3d 783 (10th Cir. 2007) (court may consult IJ opinion when BIA’s reasoning is sparse)