Viewing entries tagged
Family Unity Benefits

Comment

Board of Immigration Appeals Reaffirms that a Grant of Family Unity Benefits does not Qualify as an Admission in any Status for the Purpose of Cancellation of Removal for Lawful Permanent Residents

This week, the Board of Immigration Appeals again determined that a grant of family unity benefits does not qualify as admission in any status for the purpose of cancellation of removal for lawful permanent residents.  Coincidentally, the Ninth Circuit issued a decision on the same day reaching the same holding.  Both decision rely on the rationale of the Board of Immigration Appeals earlier decision in Matter of Reza-Murillo

My blog post on the related Ninth Circuit case can be found here: http://www.sabrinadamast.com/journal/2015/6/10/ninth-circuit-finds-that-family-unity-benefits-do-not-qualify-as-an-admission-for-the-purpose-cancellation-of-removal-for-lawful-permanent-residents

The full text of Matter of Fajardo Espinoza can be found here: https://edit.justice.gov/sites/default/files/pages/attachments/2015/06/08/3840.pdf

Comment

Comment

Ninth Circuit Finds that Family Unity Benefits do not Qualify as an Admission for the Purpose Cancellation of Removal for Lawful Permanent Residents

In a decision earlier this week, the Ninth Circuit resolved tension between its case law and the Board of Immigration Appeals' case law on whether a grant of family unity benefits qualified as admission for the purpose of cancellation of removal for lawful permanent residents.  In 2005, the Ninth Circuit had determined that a grant of family unity benefits would qualify as an admission in any status, as required in the cancellation statute, in its decision in Garcia-Quintero v. Gonzales.  In 2010, the Board of Immigration Appeals published its decision in Matter of Reza-Murillo, in which it came to the opposite conclusion.  In its decision this week, the Ninth Circuit deferred to Matter of Reza-Murillo, finding that the Board of Immigration Appeals' interpretation of the word "admitted" to require a "lawful entry after inspection and admission" (a procedural regularity not required to be granted family unity benefits) to be reasonable.

The full text of Medina-Nunez v. Lynch can be found here: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/06/08/14-70657.pdf

Comment