Cases Decided

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

Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. __, 130 S. Ct. 1473, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 2928 (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. ___, 130 S. Ct. 827, 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...

Court Remands GITMO Case Regarding Release of Detainees Into United States

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...

Court Finds Categorical Approach Not Applicable in Determining Amount of Fraud Loss

Nijhawan v. Mukasey, 557 U.S. __, 129 S. Ct. 2294, 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 Post-9/11 Detention Suit

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, No. 07-1015, 556 U.S. __, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 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. __, 129 S. Ct. 1886, 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...

Court Holds Traditional Standard Applies to Stays of Removal Pending Petitions 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...

Court Holds Noncitizens Granted Voluntary Departure may Seek Reopening

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...

Prevailing Party May Recover Paralegal Fees Under EAJA

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...