The Seventh Circuit has affirmed that a pardon from a state governor does not impact any inadmissibility consequences of the pardoned crime.
The full text of Wojciechowicz v. Garland can be found here:
Viewing entries in
New Case Law
The Fifth Circuit has determined that an asylum applicant has the obligation to provide some evidence of the social distinction of her nuclear family in her society when relying on that family as a particular social group for asylum purposes. The Court was also critical of the Biden Administration’s failure to promulgate proposed regulations on family-based particular social groups.
The full text of Garcia-Gonzalez v. Garland can be found here:
https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/22/22-60501-CV0.pdf
The First Circuit has determined that the location of the administrative control court (i.e., where the charging document is filed) - absent an order for change of venue - dictates in which federal circuit appellate review lies.
The full text of Bazile v. Garland can be found here:
The First Circuit has determined that the Board of Immigration Appeals can use its sua sponte authority to reopen for a non-citizen to pursue NACARA relief, rejecting the argument that a motion to reopen under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.43(e)(1) is the only available means for reopening for NACARA relief.
The full text of Mancia v. Garland can be found here:
The Eleventh Circuit has determined that a federal court lacks jurisdiction to review the agency’s revocation of an approved Form I-130.
The full text of Bouarfa v. Secretary of DHS can be found here:
https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/202212429.pdf
The Eleventh Circuit has determined that a litigant who withdrew his appeal and ask to be deported forfeited his right to judicial review of his citizenship claim.
The full text of Clement v. U.S. Attorney General can be found here:
https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/202113382.pdf
The Ninth Circuit has determined that the appointment and removal process for Immigration Judges - who the court determined are inferior officers - complies with the constitution.
The full text of Duenas v. Garland can be found here:
https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2023/07/27/18-71987.pdf
An amended decision can be found here:
https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2023/08/24/18-71987.pdf
The Eighth Circuit has determined that an Iowa conviction for domestic abuse assault with the use or display of a weapon is a crime of violence because the display of a dangerous weapon requires at least the threatened use of physical force, and there is no distinction between the “use” and the “display” of a dangerous weapon under Iowa law.
The full text of U.S. v. Conrad can be found here:
The Eighth Circuit has reaffirmed that a Missouri statute criminalizing resisting arrest is divisible as compared to the definition of a crime of violence. “Our decisions concluded that resisting arrest by using or threatening the use of force is a ‘violent felony’ under the Armed Career Criminal Act, but that resisting arrest by fleeing is not a ‘crime of violence’ under the sentencing guidelines.”
The full text of U.S. v. Brown can be found here:
Deferring to the agency’s decision in Matter of T-C-A-, the Fourth Circuit has determined that a non-citizen whose asylum status has been terminated cannot apply for adjustment of status as an asylee. “Since Cela’s asylum status had been terminated at the time he sought to adjust to lawful permanent resident status, he was not eligible for that adjustment.”
The full text of Cela v. Garland can be found here:
The Eighth Circuit has determined that the Nebraska shoplifting statute has a broader mens rea than the generic definition of a theft-related aggravated felony. “Because an offender can be convicted under Nebraska’s shoplifting statute when he acts with an intent not encompassed by a generic theft offense, we hold that the statute sweeps more broadly than the generic federal offense.”
The full text of Thok v. Attorney General can be found here:
The Eighth Circuit has determined that an Iowa conviction for committing willful injury - even the less serious offense that requires mere injury, as opposed to serious injury - is a crime of violence. “Committing willful injury in Iowa requires an unjustified ‘act’ that is ‘intended to cause serious injury.’ The fact that the statute requires an intent to cause harm to another person necessarily means that anyone who violates it has used ‘physical force against the person of another.’”
The full text U.S. v. Cungtion, Jr. can be found here:
The Fifth Circuit has determined that a reinstatement order is a final order of removal, and therefore, a petition for review must be filed within 30 days of the issuance of that order. The existence of an ongoing withholding/CAT only proceedings does not toll the deadline for filing that petition for review.
The full text of Argueta-Hernandez v. Garland can be found here:
https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/22/22-60307-CV0.pdf
The Fourth Circuit reversed a reasonable internal relocation finding, noting that an asylum applicant’s ability to live in hiding for 3-4 weeks in Islamabad does not meet the government’s burden to prove that he could safely internally relocate there away from the Taliban.
The full text of Ullah v. Garland can be found here:
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221026.P.pdf
The court granted a petition for rehearing and remanded the case for the agency to determine if asylum should be granted as a matter of discretion:
The Fourth Circuit re-affirmed its strong family-based particular social group case law, finding that “young male family members of [the applicant’s] cousin Emily” is a cognizable social group.
The full text of Santos Garcia v. Garland can be found here:
The Fourth Circuit has found that a Notice to Appear (NTA) missing the time and date of the first hearing precludes the entry of an in absentia removal order. This remains true even if the non-citizen moves from the address listed on the putative NTA and does not notify the agency.
The full text of Lazo-Gavidia v. Garland can be found here:
The Fourth Circuit has remanded the denial of a religion-based asylum claim brought by a Pentecostal Christian. “Review of the record demonstrates that Chicas-Machado established that one central reason MS-13 chose to target her was her religion. Even the motive for the gang’s persecution that the BIA recognized — her use as a potential asset to the gang because ‘no one would suspect [her]’ given ]her activity and conduct with the church — was inextricably intertwined with her religion.”
The court also emphasized that an asylum applicant is not required to show that a persecutor intends to stop or hinder her religious practice. “There is no dispute over the fact that Chicas-Machado’s activities — spreading the word of God, acting as the church’s secretary, and telling young people to attend church — constitute religious practice. So the only disputed issue is whether, in targeting Chicas-Machado because of her religious activities and then threatening to murder her, MS-13 restricted or suppressed her ability to participate in these religious activities.”
The full text of Chicas-Machado v. Garland can be found here:
The Third Circuit has determined that an incomplete Notice to Appear (i.e., one lacking the date and time of a first hearing) precludes the entry of an in absentia removal order. “According to the Department, this disjunctive phrasing makes Madrid-Mancia’s defective NTA immaterial. Madrid-Mancia got a ‘Notice of Hearing,’ and that alone, it concludes, is enough for in absentia removal. That is not enough because § 1229a(b)(5)(A) always requires a complete NTA. And the Attorney General cannot cure defects in an NTA by sending out a self-styled ‘Notice of Hearing’ because announcing the time and date of a removal hearing for the first time is not a ‘change or postponement’ in the time or place.”
The full text of Madrid-Mancia v. Attorney General can be found here:
The Second Circuit has determined that the factors outlined in Matter of Sanchez Sosa apply to a motion to remand filed when a case is on appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals.
The full text of Paucar v. Garland can be found here:
The First Circuit has remanded a CAT claim in which the agency discredited an expert’s opinion without sufficient reason.
The full text of G.P. v. Garland can be found here: