Skip to Content

Cases Decided

Second or Subsequent Possession Conviction is Not an Aggravated Felony

Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder, No. 09-60, 560 U.S. ___, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 4764 (2010)

The Supreme Court held that a second or subsequent simple drug possession conviction does not qualify as an aggravated felony under INA § 101(a)(43)(B) (“drug trafficking crimes”) and therefore does not preclude a lawful permanent resident from applying for cancellation of removal. Read more...

FTCA Exclusive Remedy for Damages Claims against Public Health Service

Hui v. Castaneda, 559 U.S. ___, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 3676 (May 3, 2010)


In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that a suit against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) is the exclusive remedy for claims arising from medical care and related functions provided by Public Health Service (PHS) personnel acting within the scope of their employment. The damages suit was brought by the heir and representative of a former ICE detainee who died of cancer at the age of 36 after allegedly receiving inadequate medical care by PHS personnel that amounted to malpractice and a violation of his constitutional rights. Read more...

Supreme Court Protects Right to Immigration Advice for Noncitizens in Criminal Proceedings

Padilla v. Kentucky, 130 S. Ct. 1473 (2010)

In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court held that criminal defense lawyers must advise their noncitizen clients about the risk of deportation if they accept a guilty plea. The Court recognized that current immigration laws impose harsh and mandatory deportation consequences onto criminal convictions, and that Congress eliminated from the laws the Attorney General’s discretionary authority to cancel removal in meritorious cases. The Court said, “These changes to our immigration law have dramatically raised the stakes of a noncitizen’s criminal conviction. The importance of accurate legal advice for noncitizens accused of crimes has never been more important.” Read more...

Supreme Court Holds that Courts Have Jurisdiction to Review Motions to Reopen

Kucana v. Holder, 558 U.S. ___, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 764 (Jan. 20, 2010)

 

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that the courts of appeals have jurisdiction to review a BIA decision denying a motion to reopen. Read more...

Supreme Court Remanded GITMO Case Regarding Whether Court Can Order Detainees Released Into U.S.

Kiyemba v. Obama, 555 F.3d 1022 (D.D.C. 2009), cert. granted, No. 08-1234, 2009 U.S. LEXIS 7566 (U.S. Oct. 20, 2009), and vacated, 559 U.S.___ (2010)

Petitioners, Uighurs who have been detained at Guantanamo for over eight years, filed a habeas petition challenging their indefinite detention. Read more...

Supreme Court Finds Categorical Approach Not Applicable for Determining Loss Amount for Fraud Offense

Nijhawan v. Mukasey, 557 U.S. __, 2009 U.S. LEXIS 4320 (June 15, 2009)

The Supreme Court addressed what evidence an IJ may consider to determine removability based on an aggravated felony conviction under INA § 101(a)(43)(M)(i), an offense that involves fraud or deceit in which the loss to the victim or victims exceeds $10,000. Read more...

Supreme Court Reverses Second Circuit Decision On Suit Filed by Immigrant Detained After 9/11

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, No. 07-1015, 556 U.S. __, 2009 U.S. Lexis 3472 (May 18, 2009)

On May 18, 2009, a divided Supreme Court reversed the Second Circuit's decision upholding the denial of a motion to dismiss respondent's complaint alleging constitutional violations by defendants. Following his arrest and detention for more than 150 days in a maximum security detention center after 9/11 attacks, respondent Iqbal, who is a Muslim and a native of Pakistan, filed a lawsuit against then-Attorney General, John Ashcroft and other officers and officials. The complaint alleged that government officials adopted an unconstitutional policy of subjecting certain individuals to harsh conditions of confinement based on their race, religion, or national origin. Iqbal claimed that petitioners violated his First and Fifth Amendment rights. Read more...

Supreme Court Rejects Government's Argument in Aggravated Identity Theft Case

Flores-Figueroa v. United States, No. 08-108, 556 U.S. __, 2009 U.S. LEXIS 3305 (May 4, 2009)

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that the aggravated identity theft statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(1), requires federal prosecutors to show that a defendant knew the means of identification belonged to another person. Read more...

Supreme Court Holds that Traditional Stay Standard Applies to Stays of Removal Pending a Petition for Review

Nken v. Holder, 129 S. Ct. 1749 (2009)

The Supreme Court held that a court of appeals should apply the traditional criteria governing stays when adjudicating a stay of removal pending a petition for review. In doing so, the Court rejected the government’s argument that the stringent standard in INA § 242(f)(2) (“clear and convincing evidence” that the removal order “is prohibited as a matter of law") applies. The Court’s decision reversed the Fourth and Eleventh Circuits, which had held that INA § 242(f)(2) applies to stays of removal pending petitions for review. Read more...

Supreme Court Holds that Fifth Circuit Misapplied Fedorenko v. United States

Negusie v. Holder, 129 S. Ct. 1159 (2009)

In an 8-1 decision, the Supreme Court held that the Fifth Circuit misapplied the Supreme Court case, Fedorenko v. United States, 449 U.S. 490 (1981), to find that the persecutor bar at INA § 208(b)(2)(A)(i) applies even if a person's assistance in persecution was coerced or the product of duress. Read more...