RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 21a0230p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ FRANCISCA HERNANDEZ-HERNANDEZ; A. L. H. H., │ Petitioners, │ > No. 21-3210 │ v. │ │ MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, │ Respondent. │ ┘ On Petition for Review from the Board of Immigration Appeals. Nos. A 209 290 827; A 209 290 828. Decided and Filed: October 4, 2021 Before: SUTTON, Chief Judge; BATCHELDER and LARSEN, Circuit Judges. _________________ COUNSEL ON BRIEF: Kirby J. Fullerton, CARMANFULLERTON, PLLC, Lexington, Kentucky, for Petitioners. Nancy E. Friedman, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. _________________ OPINION _________________ LARSEN, Circuit Judge. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) initiated removal proceedings against Francisca Hernandez-Hernandez and her daughter. Hernandez applied for asylum and withholding of removal.1 The immigration judge (IJ) and the Board of 1She filed an asylum claim on behalf of her daughter as well. That claim is derivative of Hernandez’s, however, so we do not discuss the daughter’s claim separately. Hernandez originally sought protection under the Convention Against Torture as well, but she has since abandoned the claim. We do not discuss that claim further. No. 21-3210 Hernandez-Hernandez, et al. v. Garland Page 2 Immigration Appeals (BIA) denied relief and ordered Hernandez and her daughter removed to Guatemala. We DENY the petition for review. I. Hernandez is a native and citizen of Guatemala. She has two minor children. Her daughter, A. L. H. H., is also a native and citizen of Guatemala. Her son, born in 2018, is a U.S. citizen. In mid-July 2016, Hernandez left Guatemala with her daughter and entered the United States without authorization. DHS later initiated removal proceedings against them under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i). Before the IJ, Hernandez conceded removability but sought asylum and withholding of removal. Her application alleged that she was a member of the indigenous K’iche’, whom the Guatemalan government does not help. She alleged that she and her family are “very poor,” that “there are no police or hospital[s] in [their] town,” that she “received a very limited public education,” and that she was “unable to leave [their] town or obtain good employment to support [her] daughter.” She expressed fear that the Guatemalan government would persist in its failure to aid the K’iche’ and that she would “not be able to better [her] situation so [she] can support [her] daughter.” In sum, Hernandez claimed that she had suffered and feared future “persecution in the form of severe economic disadvantage or the deprivation of liberty, food, housing, employment and other essentials of life” on account of her status as an indigenous K’iche’ woman. Hernandez testified before the IJ. She explained that she came to the United States for economic reasons and to secure a better life for her daughter. In Guatemala, she attended school only through the fourth or fifth grade. She grew up poor; her family farmed for a living. When she turned twelve, she began farming with her dad. …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals