Case: 21-60103 Document: 00516388810 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/11/2022 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED July 11, 2022 No. 21-60103 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Carolina Trinidad Vasquez-Rodriguez, Petitioner, versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals No. A 098 882 063 Before Smith, Duncan, and Oldham, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Petitioner Carolina Vasquez-Rodriguez’s brief describes the peti- tioner as “having been born biologically female and identifying as male.” Vasquez-Rodriguez petitions for review of a decision by the Board of Immi- gration Appeals (“BIA”) denying a motion to reopen removal proceedings. Vasquez-Rodriguez moved to reopen on the ground that violence against * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circum- stances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 21-60103 Document: 00516388810 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/11/2022 No. 21-60103 persons sharing Vasquez-Rodriguez’s self-identification had markedly in- creased in El Salvador. The immigration judge (“I.J.”) rejected that position, and the BIA dismissed the appeal. Because that decision is supported by substantial evidence, we deny the petition for review. I. Vasquez-Rodriguez entered the United States illegally in 2005. Shortly afterwards, Border Patrol agents apprehended Vasquez-Rodriguez and issued a Notice to Appear at a removal hearing. But Vasquez-Rodriguez did not appear and so was ordered removed in absentia. In 2019, Vasquez-Rodriguez filed a motion to reopen removal pro- ceedings on account of changed country conditions. The motion claimed that persons sharing petitioner’s self-identification are now subject to a sig- nificantly greater risk of persecution than they were in 2005. As evidence, the motion presented a series of reports and news articles and the expert opin- ion of an academic. Those sources note increases in the power of Salvadoran gangs over the preceding decade or so, with a corresponding increase in vio- lence. Much of that violence has been directed toward persons with Vasquez- Rodriguez’s self-identification (and the opposite, persons born male who identified as female). The I.J. denied Vasquez-Rodriguez’s motion. The I.J. reasoned that, although petitioner had presented evidence that persons with petitioner’s self-identification were threatened with violence in El Salvador, that showing did not mean that the violence had significantly worsened since the issuance of the removal order in 2005. Thus, Vasquez-Rodriguez had not shown a material change in country conditions. The BIA affirmed and adopted the I.J.’s decision, adding only a few paragraphs of its own reasoning. II. We apply a “highly deferential abuse-of-discretion standard” to the 2 Case: 21-60103 Document: 00516388810 Page: 3 Date Filed: 07/11/2022 No. 21-60103 BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. Nunez v. Sessions, 882 F.3d 499, 505 (5th Cir. 2018) (per curiam). “So long as the Board’s decision is not capricious, racially invidious, utterly without foundation in the evidence, or otherwise so irrational that it is arbitrary rather than the result of any perceptible rational approach, …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals