Lopez Martinez v. Blanche

── Lopez Martinez v. Blanche ── Court: Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Date: April 23, 2026 Category: General United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 25-1225 VICTOR GEOVANY LOPEZ MARTINEZ; M.G.L.G., Petitioners, v. TODD BLANCHE,* Acting Attorney General, Respondent. PETITION FOR REVIEW OF AN ORDER OF THE BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS Before Montecalvo, Rikelman, and Aframe, Circuit Judges. SangYeob Kim, with whom Gilles Bissonnette, Chelsea Eddy, American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire, Irene C. Freidel, and PAIR Project were on brief, for petitioners. Nathan P. Warecki and Nixon Peabody LLP on brief for former Immigration Judges, Appellate Immigration Judges, and Members of the Board of Immigration Appeals, as amici curiae, in support of petitioners. * Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c)(2), Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche is automatically substituted for former Attorney General Pamela J. Bondi as Respondent.  Adam J. Kessel and Fish & Richardson P.C. on brief for Immigration Law Professors, as amici curiae, in support of petitioners. Sabrineh Ardalan and Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinical Program on brief for the American Immigration Lawyers Association and Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, as amici curiae, in support of petitioners. Jennifer A. Singer, Senior Trial Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Office of Immigration Litigation, with whom Brett A. Shumate, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, and Shelley R. Goad, Assistant Director, Office of Immigration Litigation, were on brief, for respondent. April 23, 2026  AFRAME, Circuit Judge. Victor Geovany Lopez Martinez is a Honduran citizen. He brings a petition for review challenging the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") denial of his applications for asylum and withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act ("INA") based on his political opinions and religion.1 Lopez contends that, in rejecting these claims, the BIA wrongly concluded that his opposition to gangs categorically is not a political opinion and failed to address adequately his religion-based claims. We grant the petition and remand for further proceedings. I. A. Lopez and his minor son arrived in the United States in August 2017. Because Lopez did not possess a valid visa or other entry document, he was detained pending a credible fear interview by an asylum officer. Following the interview, the officer referred Lopez's case to an immigration judge ("IJ"). A few months later, the Department of Homeland Security issued Lopez a notice to appear and initiated removal proceedings. Just shy of a year after his arrival in the United States, Lopez applied for, among other relief, asylum and withholding of removal with his son as a 1 Lopez also applied for protection under the Convention Against Torture but does not pursue that claim in this Court. - 3 - derivative applicant.2 In so doing, he claimed that "he reasonably fear[ed] returning to Honduras because of his religion, his family relationship to his son, . . . and his political opinion[,] which was his expressed opposition to the gangs." The IJ convened a removal hearing to consider Lopez's applications. Lopez submitted affidavits and testified in support of his claims. We summarize that evidence here. See Barnica-Lopez v. Garland, 59 F.4th 520, 525 n.1 (1st Cir. 2023) (noting that we draw the facts from the administrative record). Lopez is a devoted evangelical Christian who "spread the word of God" in his