good morning may please the court my name is glendale donna madrid of the northwest immigrant rights project on behalf of the petitioner so some a fight i'd like to reserve two minutes for rebuttal i may just watch your time your honour's at the heart of this case is church and family which challenge the supremacy of the m s thirteen gang and their local community by running a rehabilitation program for gang members seeking to leave the gang that most thirteen responded with intimidation threats and murder both the agency and miss on photo agree that it was this work to diminish the gangs ranks that resulted in the m s thirteen as persecution where they disagree is whether this work which was carried out through the church and led by missile fire was family the act of persecution but that there was past persecution i guess you know you know as it seems to me that even if i buy your argument about the group i've got to find th a or the b i said something about this is persecution which is past persecution so therefore you get the presumption and i didn't find anything that they ever say that there  d certainly if i could have my question answered my worry is they never found any persecution here and therefore they all they concentrated all on the group and so i'm trying to determine do i have to remain around for past to find the persecution if you will your honor what the what the agency below failed to find was a nexus to a protected ground so it was on the on account of element of past persecution  the agency did not make an express finding that the harm rose to the level of persecution but they do refer to the targeting of miss a vital family as persecution and we would submit that the record is clear and compels a conclusion under the case l the circuit that the harm itself rose to the level of persecution but it is correct that the agency did not make a full finding as to whether she had demonstrated past persecution because it found that she had failed to demonstrate that the gang was motivated on account of a protected ground so to be clear yet element they found missing in past persecution was on account of that's correct thank you now the b i seem to believe that the activism of the church and the family was mute the exclusive with their the fact that they were carrying out three church and through their family saying that the thirteen was only motivated by a personal vendetta against the individuals involved in the rehabilitation effort didn't say only they said that was a possible alternative your honor that is correct they said with regards to the event is that it there might have been two possible explanations one of which may have been a personal vendetta that i said that there was that it was unclear why the nephew was targeted that he didn't know if the nephew was shot because there was some sort of connection to the church or whether the nephew was somebody who perhaps had resisted getting rich croup and so what they're suggesting is there could have been an alternative explanation they said there were t person of and that i suppose is but individuals were targeted but there is no evidence of a personal vendetta apart from resistance to the gang no your honor there isn't and so the case love the circuit has made clear in florida's rio's v lynch but  been that i can be on account of a protected ground and that's what we have here even if a purely richard retore motivic this did you got to be holder this court also held that the existence of a richard retore motive does not negate a valid asylum claim affirmatively into the local community and courage gang members to defect from the gangs offering that in the record yes your honor where this is the only record in the record that they went out into the community and encourage people they were to rehabilitate them and to encourage them to retire from the gangs well the thing that worries me a little bit about this is why i asked the question she was asked if she was a part of this group or this church who was doing this but then she was asked don't all the other churches do you know of any church in el salvador excuse me in this country that doesn't do this and she said no they all do this honor i am not exactly sure that she never said but there are other churches and gates and religious activism the way that her church did when her family led it and her church was not merely preaching against the gangs which is what churches  often do the church was actually putting themselves out on the line by having a rehabilitation program they ran out of their church which was also the family home and the gang itself when it threatened missile fire a sister who was a church pastor said that it was that church  it was that work of the church to help the young men gang members leave that kind of life that got the attention of the gang it wasn't me or passive resistance to the gang if a gang comes to you oppose the gang it's actively encouraging gang members to leave the gang and chipping away at the gangs power within that local community the question because i want to check the record on that that was a worry that i had general resistance is not enough somebody has got to do something more than generally resist would you agree i agree on all the facts of this case that mistreat that here we have very clear religious activism driven by a religious mission that's a part this case from what you often see in terms of opposition to the gangs and also of adore and the evidence here i would submit that compels a finding of past persecution on account of religion and political end of time so forgive me for interrupting but if we agree with you on past and just leave it for them to take from there you want to reconsider her claims from that point forward well your honor we would we believe that you just did not make arguments to that would have that would go to the questions of fundamental change in circumstances and reasonable and the result of internal relocation if the answer to my question is yes you could just say yes yes well your honor we think that you can remain with more specific instructions at the agency so so what what would you what are you asking us to do to remain with the sections that she has met her burden to demonstrate past persecution therefore and i thought that's what i call it was asking you the assertions to this group and if there is past persecution doesn't seem to me there's any evidence in the record for future persecution other than having this reference if you will to the persecution by the group i what she's really asking you is it doesn't mean seem to me we can really get to asylum because the future addressed that's not what i'm asking i'm asking what you're asking us to do if we find and i appreciate judge dismissed clarification i'm asking what relief you want your clear in your brief an argument today that you want to rule that the forgive me the request for humanitarian relief that went unaddressed because there wasn't finding a pass persecution and that would have to be taken up on remap we would not reach that you're not asking for that we think that the record is clear that she satisfies both of those your honor but if threatened her directly with raping cutting and murdering her if she did not exceed to their demands and i can give you records when i come out it was when they were trying to get money from or from her her partner's right it's correct that they were asking for good morning or honors me please the court then silent on behalf of the attorney general the first thing i'd like to do in your honour's is address judge smith's question about persecution so that i'll go to the main issue in the case which is that on the count of  nexus part it's the government's position that the board the board and the immigration judge did not address the issue of persecution in this case with respect to whether or not the past harm reaches the level of persecution the only issue in this case that the court that the agency addressed with respect to asylum in withholding of removal is whether or not the gang's targeted petitioner on account of her protect protected ground so you would want us to not reach that issue either is that right well i w submit that if the court finds that there was a nexus or that remained is necessary because of the on account of problems that it had to have to be sent back to the board for a determination on persecution because sorry i didn't mean to interrupt but i just did i'm sorry is it is it the it's the government's reading that that sentence that the board wrote goes specifically to the on account of pronk i believe that's on the second page of its decision and it says the reason she did not meet past persecution was specifically because the harm was not on account of it doesn't discuss the level of the level of harm and whether or not it rises to the level of persecution with respect to the i think the main part of the case which is the on account of pronk the immigration judge and the board determined that after examining the evidence the record and the testimony that petitioner failed to present evidence that those that harmed her did so because of her religion family or political opinion and as the supreme court is held and as this course the agency has to look at motive and when looking at motive and you decide you have to examine whether or not the persecutors was motivated as we're looking at knew or believed that person that the applicant had protected ground and was targeted because of that reason and in examine the evidence the immigration judge and the board concluded that the evidence did not find that the persecutors were motivated to harm petitioner because of a protected ground unfortunately all salvador is a country that is replete with gang violence petitioner was threatened on occasion which in two thousand and fourteen which had to do with extortion there was no link between that and the religion or political future of business ownership status that's correct the second part that's correct part about personal vendetta now we're really going out that that's why i asked counsel about this there's no question that we cannot find that there would be this protected group with just a general resistance the gang membership so i guess i'm trying to figure out what is there in this record that would suggest it's more than a general resistance to gang membership and you heard what she responded to you to me they went out recruited people to come in to their ospital or their to the church to give them help they went out and tried to do something that would actually support the idea that they did not support the ga i didn't say as well as she did how do you respond to that well your honor that's not my understanding of the record and that's not what the immigration judge concluded while petitioners position was that the church articulate in  gang sentiment there is no evidence i believe that was stated that they went onto the street corners and protested or tried to recruit people i didn't see that come across that in the record and perhaps i'm mistaken but i don't see that anywhere if you think that excitation if you read from the record ladies testimony shows that they went out and recruit my understanding is that in the quote from petitioner on page one fifty of the record was there help going members to retire from gangs they were involved in drugs alcohol these youngsters my sister and her husband that's what they help them i do not under and in reading her declaration i didn't see anywhere that say that they went out and recruit people so of what they were  course that the gangs were really quite really mad and angry against them because the young gang members were being helped by the church and that the family were going to be killed one by one year by year the second is that the nephew douglas was trying to get away from gang so he moved into the family home the gang called the family home and said they would kill her whole family because of what the game was doing and they specifically mentioned douglas and that she testifies about the gang members coming into the church and shooting this child murdering him in the church what about that no dispute that that that occurred and she was found credible with respect to that the can i forgive me i didn't ask a good question but i want to give you a chance to answer all of it at the other part that i find very troubling is that the uncle who was the minister in the church of course was murdered also and when they found him his body showed signs of torture perspex civically that his ears were cut off and as eyes were gouged out which would be consistent certainly circumstantial evidence of gang was not happy with him meddling in their business so what about that your honor i don't i don't disagree mean that there's it seems very speculative to suggest it's anything else well i think immigration judges in the best position to analyze the facts and you know having taken a view at viewing the testimony reading the record came to a conclusion that the inference is that these were possibly based on religious motivations were actually more akin to personal retribution or personal vendettas which is which is what i believe the immigration judge generally sees are cases where people resist gang violence and the record makes that clear that individuals who resist gang violence the gangs are very intent on making sure that they are you know the gangs can keep their power in consolidated crime you've got the gang any more effectively helping people get out of it if that gang knows that why isn't that what happens in response to that only account of what i think and then that goes to you can be against the gang but that doesn't mean that it's a protected ground if this was a secular club for instance and that was advocating against people being in began being of a gang that wouldn't be a protected ground either but they didn't just oppose the gang in a in a belief that they held to themselves they were out there in the communing according to her to testimony you're absolutely right that the idea is in the best position to gauge that and that i j found her credible so i'm just looking at you know from this protected ground it is there was no testimony that when the gang members came in and shot her nephew or when they there's no evidence that when they killed her brother in law that they did so because of a protected ground there's no evidence but what this is the rare this is the rare case where the where they have a direct testimony about receiving a threat that we're going to kill you because of this work that's pretty unusual one much for us to there's a testimony that is this and i just want to make sure this is the testimony that were her sister was called or is this the testimony where he the family was called they were going to be killed one by one year by year because of their helping the gangs the gangs really upset with them for this reason is this test me i just read sure and that i think goes to the gang was upset with him for trying to take members of the gang away from them as opposed to it being because of religious reason or being because of what they were trying to take them away because that's what their religion taught as i understood the record is erroneous understanding while the immigration judge didn't find that the immigration judge found that the reason the gang was unhappy with the family or unhappy with him was because the nephew was leaving the gang the gang wants to protect its ranks and because we don't really know family being a part of the church goes out and if a young man comes to the church and says i need some help getting out of this gang and i need some help getting off drugs and alcohol and they help them do that as long as the young man coming to the church they haven't done enough more than just general resistance that in order to get to the general resistance they've got to do something more they've got to recruit or they've got to demonstrate on the sidewalk or they've got to do something more than just generally help these people out of it is that what you're saying to me well i would say that in order to tie it to put an excess you would have to there needs to be evidence in each individual case as to the activities of the church or what the church is doing in this case that would make it on account of it and so i hope that that answers  gration says that her church reached out to the youth to stop using drugs and to leave the gang so that reaching out is an affirmative act and it's not mere passive resistance or even waiting for a gang member to come to church and ask for help there were from really going out and asking and encouraging gang members to leave that life secondly your honor here their obvious signs connecting this persecution to the church and to the family the nephew was gunned down in church at the end of services in front of the congregation in a very public manner in front of my son father who took him to the hospital within three weeks of that the pastor was kidnapped mutilated and murdered and then shortly after that on numerous occasions the gang members attempted to break into the church after church services at a moment when the church was very visible in the public eye so we submit that the evidence here compels a finding that misled fido was persecuted on account of her religion her family and also her political opinion thank you very much i think part in the process or carefully that was impress me and thank you both for your argument it is very very helpful we'll take that case surgery advise minimal go on to the next case on the record