Cases Decided

Dada v. Mukasey, 554 U.S. 1 (2008)

A divided Supreme Court held that voluntary departure recipients must be permitted to unilaterally withdraw a voluntary departure request before the expiration of the voluntary departure period in order “to safeguard the right to pursue a motion to reopen.” The Court, however, rejected the argument that the voluntary departure period automatically tolls when a motion to reopen is filed. Read more...

Richlin Security Service Co. v. Chertoff, 128 S. Ct. 2007 (2008)

The Court held that under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) a prevailing party may recover its paralegal fees from the government at the prevailing market rates. The government had argued that paralegal services are recoverable only at “reasonable cost” and that such costs should be measured from the perspective of the attorney rather than the client. The Court rejected the government’s arguments. In so doing, it reversed an underlying Federal Circuit decision and reached a decision that is consistent with the majority of circuits to have addressed the issue. The decision is available on the Supreme Court’s website. Read more...

United States v. Rodriquez, 553 U.S. 377 (2008)

The Court examined whether a state drug-trafficking offense, for which state law authorizes a ten-year sentence because the defendant was a recidivist, qualifies as a predicate offense under the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). In a 6-3 decision, the Court concluded that it does. The decision is available on the Supreme Court’s website. Read more...

Ali v. Achim, 551 U.S. 1188 (2007)

The Supreme Court granted certiorari to determine whether the Seventh Circuit erred 1) when it concluded that an offense does not need to be an aggravated felony to be classified as a “particularly serious crime,” and 2) when it construed the scope of the court’s jurisdiction to review the BIA’s particularly serious crime determinations under 8 U.S.C. §§ 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) and (a)(2)(D). On December 21, 2007, the petitioner filed a motion for voluntary dismissal asking the Court to dismiss the writ of certiorari pursuant to a settlement agreement. The motion states that the petitioner and the government entered into a settlement agreement and petitioner has agreed not to pursue his claims for asylum and withholding of removal. The Court dismissed the case on December 27, 2007. Read more...

Keisler v. Hong Yin Gao, 552 U.S. 801 (2007)Read more...

• The Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated the judgment, and remanded the case to the Second Circuit for further consideration in light of Gonzales v. Thomas, 547 U.S. 183, 126 S. Ct. 1613, 164 L. Ed. 2d 358 (2006).
• In Gonzales v. Thomas, the Court held that the Ninth Circuit erred by deciding, without prior resolution by the BIA, that the asylum applicants and their family would constitute a "particular social group" and should have applied the "ordinary remand rule" rather than deciding the asylum case in the first instance. The underlying court of appeals decision in Gao involves an asylum claim based on membership in a "particular social group."
  

Rashid v. Gonzales, 549 U.S. 1212 (2007)Read more...

• On Tuesday February 20, 2007, the Court denied Haroon Rashid’s petition for certiorari. The Tenth Circuit had upheld a finding that Rashid was removable because his misdemeanor assault conviction constituted an "aggravated felony." On December 6, 2006, Justice Breyer had stayed the deportation pending the Supreme Court's ruling on his petition for certiorari.

Gonzales v. Duenas-Alvarez, 549 U.S. 183 (2007)Read more...

• In a January 17, 2007 decision written by Justice Breyer, the Supreme Court found that a person who aids or abets a theft falls within the scope of the generic definition of theft. The Attorney General had sought certiorari in this Ninth Circuit removal case. The respondent, a permanent resident, was convicted of violating section 10851(a) of the California Vehicle Code. He was placed in removal proceeding and charged with removability based on an aggravated felony conviction, to wit, a theft offense as defined in INA § 101(a)(43)(G). The Ninth Circuit, relying on Penuliar v. Gonzales, 435 F.3d 961 (9th Cir. 2005), which held that the California statute is broader than the generic definition of theft, reversed the finding of removal.

Lopez v. Gonzales, 549 U.S. 47 (2006)Read more...

• On January 8, 2007, the Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari, vacated the judgment, and remanded the case to Eighth Circuit for further consideration in light of Lopez v. Gonzales. The case is Tostado-Tostado v. Carlson, No. 06-6766.

Mouelle v. Gonzales, 548 U.S. 901 (2006)Read more...

• In a summary order dated June 26, 2006, the Supreme Court vacated the Eighth Circuit’s judgment and remanded the case for further consideration in light of 71 Fed. Reg. 27,585, the interim rule regarding adjustment of status for arriving aliens.

Fernandez-Vargas v. Gonzales, 548 U.S. 30 (2006)Read more...

• In a decision dated June 22, 2006, the Supreme Court held that INA §241(a)(5) – the reinstatement of removal provision – may be applied to persons who reentered the U.S. prior to the effective date of IIRIRA (April 1, 1997) and who did not take any affirmative steps to legalize status before that date.