The Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of the federal government on Wednesday in the case of Urias-Orellana v. Bondi in an opinion written by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson that said federal courts of appeals must apply a deferential standard of review when evaluating the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision regarding whether asylum seekers have faced the level of persecution required to qualify for asylum protections.

The case originated from an asylum application submitted by Douglas Humberto Urias-Orellana, his wife Sayra Iliana Gamez-Mejia, and their child, who fled to the United States in 2021 due to threats of violence in El Salvador.

Urias-Orellana argued that the family qualified for asylum because they were being pursued in El Salvador by a hitman, known as a sicario, who had previously shot two of his half-brothers. He stated that associates of this sicario had repeatedly demanded money from him and had physically assaulted him on one occasion, the SCOTUS Blog reported.

When deciding whether to grant an asylum request, immigration judges evaluate if applicants came to the U.S. due to “persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion,” as specified in the Immigration and Nationality Act.

In the case of Urias-Orellana, a judge found that his experiences did not meet this standard, in part because the family had previously avoided danger by relocating within El Salvador. Following this ruling, the family’s legal team appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals.

However, in 2023, the board upheld the judge’s decision on persecution and the order of removal.