A Honduran man who says he was kidnapped and beaten by MS-13 gang members using soccer fan clubs as recruitment fronts has lost his appeal to stay in the United States. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled Monday that it lacked the authority to overturn previous decisions regarding his late asylum application and unexhausted legal claims.
The ruling in Osabas-Rivera v. Bondi centers on Gustavo Adolfo Osabas-Rivera, who entered the U.S. in October 2016. According to court records, Osabas-Rivera fled his home country after MS-13 members targeted him and his brother.
The gang had allegedly infiltrated the support clubs for local soccer teams, specifically targeting fans of the “Motagua” team and threatening death if they did not switch allegiance to “Olympia”—a demand that served as a proxy for gang recruitment.
READ: DOJ Sues Virginia School District After Christian Students Punished In Gender Policy Clash
Osabas-Rivera testified that after his brother fled, the gang turned on him. He described a four-hour kidnapping in 2013 where he was beaten with a gun and cut on the face for “gang pride.” despite these events, Osabas-Rivera did not file for asylum until December 2018, more than two years after his arrival and well past the one-year statutory deadline.
The three-judge appellate panel, comprised of Judges Nalbandian, Davis, and Hermandorfer, focused heavily on procedural limitations rather than the raw facts of the gang violence.
The court found it did not have jurisdiction to review the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) decision regarding the timeliness of the application. Under federal law, an applicant can bypass the one-year deadline if they show “extraordinary circumstances.”
Osabas-Rivera argued that severe depression over family separation prevented him from filing on time. However, the immigration judge previously ruled that while he was upset, his condition did not amount to a serious mental disability that would excuse the delay.
READ: CAIR Rips Florida Gov. DeSantis Order As ‘Israel First’ Stunt, Confirms Lawsuit
Citing the recent Supreme Court decision in Wilkinson v. Garland and Sixth Circuit precedent in Rahman v. Bondi, the court held that the determination of what constitutes “extraordinary circumstances” is discretionary and generally sits with the Attorney General, placing it outside the appellate court’s review power.
The panel also dismissed Osabas-Rivera’s claim for “withholding of removal,” a separate protection for those fearing persecution. The court noted that Osabas-Rivera failed to argue a critical point during his earlier appeal to the BIA: whether the Honduran government was unwilling or unable to protect him.
Records show that after his initial kidnapping report, Osabas-Rivera stopped contacting Honduran police, fearing they were corrupt. Because he did not meaningfully challenge the immigration judge’s finding on this specific issue in his brief to the BIA, the Sixth Circuit ruled the argument was forfeited and could not be revived at the federal level.
The decision denies the petition in part and dismisses it in part, affirming the removal order.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox.
