Jose Orellana-Arias v. Jefferson B. Sessions III
865 F.3d 476
| 7th Cir. | 2017Background
- Orellana-Arias, a Salvadoran national, was detained after reentering the U.S. in April 2013; he had prior removals and multiple returns.
- In El Salvador he was assaulted, extorted repeatedly by MS-13 members, threatened with death, and twice pressured to act as a police lookout; he paid small sums and fled to the U.S. in 2013.
- An asylum officer found no reasonable fear; an immigration judge later found him credible but denied withholding/CAT and found no nexus to protected grounds; the Board affirmed in part.
- Orellana-Arias argued two proposed social groups: (1) Salvadorans perceived as wealthy because they returned from the U.S.; and (2) young Salvadoran males who oppose gangs for moral/religious reasons.
- The Board and court concluded Orellana-Arias failed to show nexus between harms and membership in either group, failed to prove past persecution or a clear probability of future persecution, and failed to meet CAT standards.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nexus to proposed social groups | Orellana-Arias: gangs targeted him because he was perceived as a U.S. returnee with money and because he morally opposed gangs | Government: evidence shows general extortion and opportunistic targeting, not targeting based on group membership | Held: No nexus; record does not show gang knowledge of his beliefs or targeting because of U.S.-return status |
| Cognizability of proposed social groups | Orellana-Arias: groups are particular and tied to immutable or fundamental traits (perceived deportee-wealth; moral opposition) | Government: groups are overbroad or principally defined by wealth (not immutable) | Held: Court assumed arguendo cognizability but found resolution unnecessary because nexus lacking |
| Past persecution (asylum/withholding) | Orellana-Arias: repeated assaults, threats, and extortion constitute persecution | Government: injuries and payments amount to harassment/extortion, not persecution rising above harassment | Held: No past persecution—physical injuries/minor economic extortion insufficient under circuit precedent |
| Convention Against Torture (CAT) | Orellana-Arias: country conditions and police corruption make torture likely or show government acquiescence | Government: record lacks proof government would acquiesce or specifically target him for torture | Held: Denied—insufficient evidence that torture by or with acquiescence of public officials is more likely than not |
Key Cases Cited
- Dominguez-Pulido v. Lynch, 821 F.3d 837 (7th Cir. 2016) (standard for asylum/social-group nexus)
- Cece v. Holder, 733 F.3d 662 (7th Cir. 2013) (definition of particular social group and review standard)
- Tapiero de Orejuela v. Gonzalez, 423 F.3d 666 (7th Cir. 2005) (extortion/death threats context for persecution analysis)
- Lozano-Zuniga v. Lynch, 832 F.3d 822 (7th Cir. 2016) (nexus and CAT acquiescence standards)
- Velasquez-Banegas v. Lynch, 846 F.3d 258 (7th Cir. 2017) (persecution vs. harassment; severity threshold)