Petition for Rehearing En Banc in Edgar G.C. v. Garland

Procedural History of the Case

This case originated from the Adelanto Detention Center in Adelanto, California. Edgar applied for protection from deportation under the United Nations Convention Against Torture (CAT), but his application was denied by an Immigration Judge. The case was then appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, where Cornell Law School represented Edgar.

A three-judge panel issued a split decision: two judges voted to deny the case, while one judge voted to grant it. The decision was published, making it precedential, meaning the rules outlined in the opinion now serve as binding law for others seeking protection under CAT. Novo Legal has since partnered with Cornell Law School to petition the Ninth Circuit for a rehearing en banc, where a panel of 11 judges would be selected to revisit this important decision.

What the Case Is About:

Edgar, who was born in Mexico, was brought to the U.S. when he was just one year old. His father, a member of the Los Zetas cartel—one of Mexico’s most notorious criminal organizations—subjected Edgar to extreme violence while they lived in the U.S. Eventually, Edgar’s father was deported to Mexico.

When Edgar was placed in removal proceedings, he sought protection under CAT, fearing future harm from his father, who was now in Mexico. One key legal factor considered in these cases is whether the applicant has experienced past torture. However, two of the Ninth Circuit judges ruled that the harm Edgar suffered in the U.S. did not meet the legal definition of “torture” because it occurred outside Mexico, the country of prospective removal. Therefore, they concluded that his past harm could not be considered in evaluating the likelihood of future torture in Mexico.

The judges further reasoned that harm inflicted in the U.S. does not have any bearing on whether the same person (in this case, Edgar’s father) would torture him in Mexico.

Impact of the Decision:

Because this decision was published, it now serves as binding legal precedent. Under this ruling, survivors of past torture will have their claims disregarded if the torture occurred outside their country of origin. This decision has profound implications, as the Ninth Circuit, which is the largest circuit in the country, handles over 50% of all deportation appeals. Without a rehearing en banc, this ruling will affect hundreds of thousands of individuals immediately, and potentially millions in the future.