The Eleventh Circuit has deferred to the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision in Matter of A-B-, as a reasonable interpretation of the BIA and Eleventh Circuit’s particular social group precedent. As such, it rejected the petitioner’s proposed social group of “women in Mexico who are unable to leave their domestic relationship.”
“The belief of Amezcua-Preciado’s aunt that Amezcua-Preciado should return to her husband despite being abused is insufficient to determine that Mexican society as a whole perceives women who are unable to leave their relationships as a distinct group.”
“In addition, Amezcua-Preciado’s group is not defined with sufficient particularity because its boundaries are amorphous, overbroad, and subjective. As she defines it, Amezcua-Preciado’s group includes all Mexican women who cannot leave any domestic relationship, whether that is a wife unable to leave her husband or a daughter unable to leave her parents. It covers women who are ‘unable to leave’ a relationship for any reason, including for physical, legal, economic, cultural, or psychological reasons. The fact that a woman could be prevented from leaving a relationship by her psychological or economic dependence reinforces the subjective nature of this group.”
“Finally, to the extent Amezcua-Preciado’s proposed group of Mexican women who are unable to leave their domestic relationships because they fear physical or psychological abuse by their spouse or domestic partner, this group is defined by the underlying harm asserted as persecution in Amezcua-Preciado’s application for asylum and withholding of removal. The women share no ‘narrowing characteristic’ other than their risk of being persecuted. This is the kind of circular definition of a social group, created by reference to the alleged persecution, that cannot create a cognizable particular social group.”
The full text of Amezcua-Preciado v. Attorney General can be found here:
http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201814788.pdf