Supreme Court Issues Favorable Decision on § 212(c) Relief Practice Advisory for Assisting those with Cases Affected by the Decision
December 16, 2011
Under the Board’s now-rejected policy, LPRs found deportable were eligible for § 212(c) relief only if they could show that the ground of deportation was substantially equivalent to a ground of inadmissibility. The Board’s policy, referred to as the “comparable ground test,” was announced in the 2005 decisions Matter of Blake, 23 I&N Dec. 722 (BIA 2005), and Matter of Brieva, 23 I&N Dec. 766 (BIA 2005). In its decision, the Supreme Court concluded that the Board’s policy did not pass the “arbitrary and capricious” standard under the Administrative Procedures Act.
The Judulang Practice Advisory describes (1) the Court’s holding in Judulang and who is potentially affected; (2) steps that lawyers (or immigrants themselves) should take immediately in pending or already concluded removal proceedings involving such individuals; and (3) some other potential uses of the Judulang decision’s reasoning to challenge agency policy in removal cases.
[Also see, “THE IMMIGRATION PARADOX: FIFTEEN (15) TIPS FOR WINNING IMIGRATION CASES”, iUniverse, 2009; and “QUINCE (15) CONSEJOS PARA GANAR CASOS DE INMIGRACION”, iUniverse, 2011; both was Charles Jerome Ware, former U.S. Immigration Judge]
No comments:
Post a Comment