Campos-Guardado v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
809 F.2d 285 (1987)
- Written by Mary Katherine Cunningham, JD
Facts
In the fall of 1984, Sofia Campos-Guardado (defendant) illegally entered the United States from El Salvador, and the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) (plaintiff) began deportation proceedings. During the proceedings, Campos sought asylum on the basis of her political opinions or on the basis of her membership in a social group. Campos testified that she went to visit her uncle who was involved in a controversial land-reform movement as the leader of an agricultural cooperative. Campos testified that her uncle told her that two men had demanded the cooperative’s money and he had refused. Campos testified that these two men returned to the uncle’s home and dragged Campos, her uncle, and her cousins to the rim of the farm’s waste pit. Campos testified that her uncle and male cousin were hacked at with machetes and shot to death while she and her female cousins were raped by the attackers. Campos testified the attackers shouted political slogans while attacking her and her family. Campos testified that the attackers cut her loose and threatened to kill her if she did not flee immediately. Campos returned to San Salvador, but she testified that she was later threatened by the attackers and her workplace was burned down by guerillas. After the immigration judge (IJ) denied her application for asylum, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed the decision, holding that an applicant for political asylum needed to show that the persecution targets the applicant’s own individual political opinions. The BIA concluded that Campos’s account of the attack at her uncle’s farm showed that the guerrillas attacked because of her uncle’s political views. The BIA found, however, that Campos failed to demonstrate that she was attacked for her own political opinions. Campos appealed to the Fifth Circuit, arguing that the reasons motivating the persecutor are of greater relevance than any opinion held by the victim and that it was unreasonable for the BIA to conclude the persecutor’s reasons for victimizing her were different than their political motivation for attacking her uncle for his political views.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Gee, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.