Argueta Castillo v. Blanche
Split Score
What is a Split Score?
This score (0-100) indicates how likely this case is to be reviewed by the Supreme Court based on:
Case Summary
Disposition
Affirmed
The petitioner, a Guatemalan national, sought review of the BIA’s denial of his application for cancellation of removal on the ground that his removal would cause exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his two U.S.-citizen daughters. The First Circuit concluded that, under the deferential framework mandated by Wilkinson v. Garland, the agency’s findings were adequately supported and therefore denied the petition, effectively affirming the BIA.
Circuit Split Identified
Legal Issue
After Wilkinson v. Garland (2024), what is the proper standard of review a court of appeals should apply to the BIA’s application of the “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” standard in cancellation-of-removal cases: substantial-evidence review or clear-error review?
Circuit Positions
Apply substantial-evidence standard of review to the BIA’s hardship determination.
Apply clear-error standard of review to the BIA’s hardship determination.
No definitive position yet—court expressly declines to decide between substantial-evidence and clear-error review.
Conflict Summary
Some circuits treat the question as one of substantial-evidence review, giving strong deference to the agency’s mixed factual determination; the Second Circuit, by contrast, applies clear-error review. The First Circuit in this opinion expressly notes the disagreement but declines to choose a side, deciding the case would be affirmed under either standard.