The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on November 5, 2026, to grant asylum to Nelson Alexander Campos Cisnero and his son, Leonardo Adonay Campos Rodriguez, reversing previous decisions by an Immigration Judge and the Board of Immigration Appeals. The court found that the lower courts had not adequately considered the evidence presented by the petitioners regarding their fear of persecution in El Salvador. This decision affects the family’s ability to remain in the United States, allowing them to escape potential harm they face if returned to their home country.

The case, Campos Cisnero v. Blanche, No. 23-2020, centers on the claims made by Nelson and Leonardo for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The court's ruling is significant as it highlights the challenges faced by individuals fleeing violence and gang-related threats in their home countries.

Background

Nelson Campos Cisnero and his son Leonardo are originally from El Salvador, a country known for its high levels of gang violence and crime. Nelson claimed that he faced persecution from gang members due to his association with a rival gang, which led to threats against his life and forced him to abandon several jobs. Leonardo, on the other hand, faced bullying and threats from his classmates who were gang members, pressuring him to join their gang.

Their case began when they sought asylum in the United States, fearing for their safety if they returned to El Salvador. An Immigration Judge initially denied their claims, stating that Nelson had not established a pattern of persecution and that Leonardo’s experiences did not rise to the level of persecution. The family then appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals, which upheld the lower court's decision, prompting them to take their case to the Ninth Circuit Court.

The Ruling

The Ninth Circuit Court ruled in favor of both Nelson and Leonardo, granting their applications for asylum and withholding of removal while denying their request for protection under CAT. The court found that the Immigration Judge had erred in their assessment of the evidence, particularly in failing to consider the full context of Nelson's experiences with gang members.

The court stated, "the IJ's failure to consider them constitutes legal error," emphasizing that the evidence presented by Nelson about his previous jobs and the threats he faced were critical to establishing a pattern of persecution.

Moreover, the court pointed out that the IJ had incorrectly characterized Leonardo’s experiences as a “single incident” when he had faced repeated threats from his classmates. The ruling noted that these repeated threats could indicate a pattern of behavior that amounted to persecution.

Impact

This ruling is significant for the Campos family as it allows them to remain in the United States and escape the violence they faced in El Salvador. The decision also sets a precedent for similar cases involving asylum seekers who face gang violence. It highlights the importance of thoroughly considering all evidence when assessing claims for asylum, especially in cases involving patterns of persecution.

The Ninth Circuit's decision may encourage other individuals facing similar threats to seek asylum, knowing that the courts may take a more favorable view of their claims if they can demonstrate a pattern of persecution. This ruling also underscores the need for immigration authorities to carefully evaluate the circumstances of each case rather than relying on isolated incidents.

What's Next

The decision by the Ninth Circuit can potentially be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, but there are no indications that such an appeal will be pursued at this time. There are currently no related cases pending that directly connect to this ruling.