The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has denied an asylum petition from Moris Gonzalez Centeno, a native of El Salvador. The court ruled that Gonzalez Centeno did not provide enough evidence to support his claims of past persecution and fear of future harm from the gang MS-13. This decision affects Gonzalez Centeno's ability to remain in the United States and highlights the challenges many face when seeking asylum due to gang violence.

The case, Moris Gonzalez Centeno v. Todd Blanche (docket number 18-71499), was filed on October 29, 2026. It stems from a decision made by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) that dismissed Gonzalez Centeno's appeal against an Immigration Judge's (IJ) ruling. The IJ had previously denied his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT).

Gonzalez Centeno's legal troubles began when he sought asylum in the U.S., claiming he faced threats and extortion from MS-13 in El Salvador. He argued that he was forced to pay a weekly protection fee, was subjected to extortion attempts, and was threatened due to his association with gang members. He also expressed fear for his daughter, who he claimed was threatened by the gang. The case was brought to the Ninth Circuit after the BIA upheld the IJ's denial of his claims.

In the ruling, the court examined the evidence presented by Gonzalez Centeno. The judges noted that the BIA and IJ had found substantial evidence to support their conclusions. The court stated, "Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that Gonzalez Centeno did not suffer past persecution." The judges emphasized that the incidents he described did not meet the legal definition of persecution.

The court also addressed Gonzalez Centeno's claims of future persecution. He argued that his refusal to pay extortion money would lead to further harm. However, the court found that he did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate a direct link between his political opinion and the threats he faced. The ruling stated, "Gonzalez Centeno contends that he fears future persecution on account of his political opinion because he did not pay the extortion money that MS-13 demanded. But he testified that he was unsure why MS-13 sought to extort him."

Furthermore, the court ruled against his request for protection under CAT. Gonzalez Centeno claimed he was at risk of torture due to his past experiences with gang members and the violent environment in El Salvador. However, the judges concluded that his arguments did not convincingly demonstrate that he was likely to face torture if returned to his home country.

The ruling was issued by a panel that included Circuit Judges R. Nelson and H.A. Thomas, along with District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín, who was sitting by designation. The judges unanimously agreed to deny Gonzalez Centeno's petition for review.

This decision has significant implications for Gonzalez Centeno and others in similar situations. It underscores the difficulty of proving claims of persecution based on gang violence, particularly when the evidence is deemed insufficient by the courts. The ruling also highlights the stringent standards that asylum seekers must meet to qualify for protection in the U.S.

As a result of this ruling, Gonzalez Centeno faces the possibility of deportation back to El Salvador, where he claims he will be in danger. The court's decision lifts a temporary stay of removal that had previously been in place while the case was under review.

Looking ahead, Gonzalez Centeno may have limited options for appealing this decision. Generally, once the Ninth Circuit has ruled, further appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court are possible but often challenging. There is no indication in the court filing of any related cases pending that could impact Gonzalez Centeno's situation.