Bringas-Rodriguez v. Sessions

850 F.3d 1051 (2018)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Bringas-Rodriguez v. Sessions

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
850 F.3d 1051 (2018)

  • Written by Mike Begovic, JD

Facts

Under 8 U.S.C. § 1158, the attorney general could withhold the removal of applicants in the United States who qualified as refugees. A refugee was defined as someone unable or unwilling to return to his home country because of a well-founded fear of persecution on the basis of race, religion, nationality, or membership in a political or social group. Carlos Alberto Bringas-Rodriguez (plaintiff), a gay man, grew up in Mexico. Bringas-Rodriguez suffered horrible physical and sexual abuse from his family members and neighbors. These abuses included a rape by Bringas-Rodriguez’s uncle and regular beatings from his father. Fearing retribution, Bringas-Rodriguez never reported the abuse to his mother, his teachers, or the police. Bringas-Rodriguez fled Mexico for the United States in 2004 at age 14. Bringas-Rodriguez entered the country without inspection and began to live with his mother. In August 2010, Bringas-Rodriguez was convicted of contributing to the delinquency of a minor after hosting a small party at which a minor became intoxicated. During his 90-day jail sentence, Bringas-Rodriguez finally told his mother and a doctor about the abuse he had suffered. The Department of Homeland Security issued Bringas-Rodriguez a notice to appear after his release. Shortly after, Bringas-Rodriguez applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention against Torture protection. In his application, Bringas-Rodriguez mentioned his past abuse and his fear that he would endure future persecution as a gay man in Mexico. Bringas-Rodriguez cited the experiences of his gay friends and submitted newspaper articles and reports detailing violence against homosexuals in Mexico. The Board of Immigration Appeals rejected Bringas-Rodriguez’s application, finding that he had failed to establish past persecution and to show that the Mexican government was unable or unwilling to control private individuals responsible for the persecution. A three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit affirmed. En banc review was granted.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Wardlaw, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 742,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 986 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 986 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership