Carlos Bringas Rodriguez was repeatedly sexually abused by his relatives and neighbor as a child.  His uncle clearly told Bringas Rodriguez that he was abusing him because he was gay.  Bringas Rodriguez never reported the abuse to the police.  He testified before the Immigration Judge that several of his gay friends had reported abuse to the Mexican police and that the police had failed to do anything.  Nevertheless, the Immigration Judge found that Bringas Rodriguez had not established that the Mexican police were unable or unwilling to protect him from harm.   The Board of Immigration Appeals and the Ninth Circuit agreed.  The Ninth Circuit also noted that its decision in Castro-Martinez v. Holder foreclosed the argument that there is a pattern or practice of persecution against homosexuals in Mexico.  

The Ninth Circuit also affirmed the denial of Bringas Rodriguez's request for protection under the Convention Against Torture, finding that the past harm he experienced did not compel a finding of a likelihood of future torture and suggesting that he could internally relocate to Mexico City, an area more tolerant of homosexuals.

Finally, the Court affirmed the denial of Bringas Rodriguez's motion for remand based on his HIV diagnosis, finding that he did not provide evidence s regarding how his status as an HIV positive homosexual changes the outcome of his case, and noting that the lack of access to HIV drugs is a problem suffered not only by homosexuals but by the Mexican population as a whole. 

Judge Fletcher wrote a compelling dissent, casting doubt on the rationale of Castro- Martinez and finding that even under the standards of that case, Bringas Rodriguez had demonstrated asylum eligibility.

The full text of Bringas Rodriguez v. Lynch can be found here: