Gonzalez De Torres v. Bondi, 24-4863

Sandra Iveth Gonzalez de Torres and her two daughters, citizens of El Salvador, sought asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection in the U.S.
Their applications were denied by the Immigration Judge; the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the denial.
Gonzalez de Torres claimed persecution based on membership in the "Torres Family" social group and threats from gangs and her ex-husband.
She argued that Salvadoran authorities could not or would not protect her and her family from harm.
The police in El Salvador did intervene: her ex-husband was arrested and imprisoned, and police provided protection from gang threats.
Evidence in the record indicated El Salvador is making efforts to combat gang crime and protect citizens.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Nexus to a Protected Ground	Harm was due to membership in the "Torres Family"	Harm was criminal, not based on protected ground	No nexus found; harm not due to protected characteristic
Government Protection	Salvadoran police are unable/unwilling to protect	Police responded and protected Gonzalez de Torres	Police provided meaningful protection; claim fails
Past Persecution (Asylum/Withholding)	Suffered past persecution on a protected ground	No evidence of motivation by protected characteristic	No past persecution shown based on protected ground
CAT Claim	Entitled to protection due to risk of torture	No state acquiescence; government does not condone	No evidence government would acquiesce; CAT claim denied

Rodriguez-Zuniga v. Garland, 69 F.4th 1012 (9th Cir. 2023) (discussing the nexus requirement for asylum and withholding based on protected grounds)
Garcia v. Wilkinson, 988 F.3d 1136 (9th Cir. 2021) (distinguishing personal retribution from persecution based on protected grounds)
Andrade-Garcia v. Lynch, 828 F.3d 829 (9th Cir. 2016) (holding general government ineffectiveness in crime prevention does not equal acquiescence under CAT)