Opinion ID: 4541712
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: socially distinct 1 within the society in

Text: question. Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. at 237. We have since accorded Chevron deference to the particular social group factors elucidated in Matter of M-E-V-G-. See Reyes v. Lynch, 842 F.3d 1125, 1133–37 (9th Cir. 2016). In Reyes, we deferred to the BIA’s determination that “[t]o have the ‘social distinction’ necessary to establish a particular social group, there must be evidence showing that society in general perceives, considers, or recognizes persons sharing the particular characteristic to be a group.” Matter of W-G- R-, 26 I. & N. Dec. at 217; see also Reyes, 842 F.3d at 1136 (“[T]he proper inquiry is whether a proposed particular social group’s shared characteristic or characteristics would generally be recognizable by other members of the community, or whether . . . the proposed group would be perceived as a group by society.” (quoting Henriquez-Rivas, 707 F.3d at 1088–89 (internal quotation marks and citation 1 The BIA previously defined this factor as “social visibility,” but renamed it “social distinction” to eliminate any misconception that a particular social group must be characterized by “‘ocular’ or ‘on-sight’ visibility.” Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. at 236. CORDOBA V. BARR 7 omitted))). While the BIA has indicated that the persecutor’s perspective “may be relevant” to the extent “it can be indicative of whether society views the group as distinct,” it has also emphasized that “the persecutors’ perception is not itself enough to make a group socially distinct, and persecutory conduct alone cannot define the group.” Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. at 242 (citations omitted); see also Reyes, 842 F.3d at 1136 (deferring to the BIA’s “social distinction” requirement).