⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit hears argument in Rudon versus Blanche. The petitioner, Rudon, is a native and citizen of Belize. He applied for deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture, known as CAT. An immigration judge found his testimony credible but denied the application, and the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed, concluding that Rudon had not experienced past torture and that his fear of future torture was speculative. Rudon has petitioned this court for review. What follows is Rudon's own account, as he gave it to the immigration judge. He testified that his son leads a gang in Belize City. He testified that when his son asked him for help getting an attempted murder charge dropped, he refused. He testified that he later learned from his sister that his son had planned his death and had sent another gang member to kill him. He submitted news articles that he argues show the two men he fears have repeatedly evaded arrest and prosecution despite wanted posters and repeated arrests; the government argues those same posters and arrests show police willing to confront gang violence. He also submitted an expert report documenting his ongoing post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, which the report attributes in part to his son's attempt to kill him. Three questions run through the argument. First, whether Belizean officials acquiesced in the threatened torture, which asks whether officials were aware of it beforehand and then failed to intervene, and whether the government both could and would protect him. Second, whether a death threat can itself be past torture. Third, whether the agency properly considered all the evidence, including on whether Rudon could safely relocate within Belize.

Rudon v. Blanche (No. 24-544) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued July 10, 2026.