Family asks SCOTUS to halt deportation over cartel threats
Members of the Supreme Court sit for a new group portrait following the addition of Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, at the Supreme Court building in Washington, Friday, Oct. 7, 2022. Bottom row, from left, Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts, Associate Justice Samuel Alito, and Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Top row, from left, Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
A Mexican family facing imminent deportation is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to take up its case, with family members asserting that they are facing removal from the U.S. despite having provided authorities with “credible and detailed evidence” that they “have been explicitly threatened with death by cartel members.”
Fabian Lagunas-Espinoza and his family, who entered the country in September 2021, claim their case raises constitutional and statutory questions that involve issues of due process, “misapplication of asylum law,” and “improper factual determinations.” According to the 10-page petition submitted to the justices on Wednesday, armed members of the Los Rojos cartel in August 2021 “threatened the family at gunpoint, demanding they vacate their home within 24 hours or be killed.”
“They complied, fled their town, and entered the United States shortly thereafter,” the filing states. “Previously, Petitioner’s brother had been beaten after refusing cartel demands, and another brother was targeted and forced to flee after receiving death threats, following witnessing criminal activity.”
Despite an immigration judge finding the family members’ testimony to be credible, they were denied relief. That decision was upheld by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), even though the family members had “strong documentary evidence” showing that they would be in imminent danger if they returned to Mexico.
The family alleges that the BIA engaged in “improper factfinding” that violated the Convention Against Torture as well as Supreme Court precedent. According to the filing, the BIA allegedly inquired as to the likelihood that the family would be subjected to torture whereas the initial immigration judge who denied relief “made no specific findings” on the matter other than “merely reciting the standards and saying Petitioner had not met their burden.”
