SCOTUS nixes part of law requiring deportation of some immigrants convicted of crimes

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/17/polit...nts/index.html

Pertains only to GC holders

Which we will be one of soon enough.

This is actually very limited in scope, it only covers one of 23 definitions of what an "aggrevated felony" is, §1101(a)(43)(f) which uses the term of "crime of violence". The definition of crime of violence was deemed too vague and the whole term thrown out.

It is actually extremely unlikely for you to get an AgFel for a crime of violence without triggering any other reason for it or any other inadmissibility or ground of removal. For example you are very likely to trigger a CIMT inadmissibility/ground of removal.

His two charges for burglary are without a doubt CIMTs, however if they aren't considered to be aggrevated felonies for any other reason(s) then he can seek cancellation of removal.

Wouldnt CIMT crime invalidate your GC?

They make you deportable but they don't preclude you from seeking Cancellation of Removal. Aggrevated Felonies outright make you ineligible for relief. This is the main problem in this case, if he didn't have an Aggrevated Felony the lawyer would seek COR and continue from there.

What I assumed happened was:
1. He was placed into removal proceedings.
2. Sought LPR Cancellation of Removal.
3. Judge rejected it due to treating the burglary as a "crime of violence" and therefore an aggrevated felony, which makes him statutory ineligible.
4. Appeal to BIA that ruled the same way.
5. Appeal to 9th circuit that found "crime of violence" definition too vague and struck it down.
6. Government appealed to Supreme Court that concurred with 9th Circuit.

The case will be remanded back to the BIA that might remand it back to the IJ and he'll renew his application for Cancellation of Removal. Federal courts have limited jurisdiction in removal proceedings, they can say "you erred here, retry the case", but they can't issue a decision directly.


Aggrevated Felonies can be overcome by waiver under 212(h) however there's some limitations:
1. It can only be tied to an application for visa, adjustment of status, or admission.
So you can see it if you're applying for adjustment or coming back to US. You can't seek it standalone. In some cases LPRs will seek a re-adjustment to apply this waiver, not everyone is eligible here due to lack of a relative that can get you an IR petition.
2. It is not available if you were originally admitted as an LPR and either you committed the crime within 7 years of admission or committed an aggrevated felony at any time. This only applies if you entered with an immigrant visa and not adjusted status in US or were never a permanent resident.

As you can imagine this can lead to very strange situations where an LPR will want a removal order to get rid of their Permanent Residence so they can adjust again and seek the waiver. Or where the waiver is unavailable solely because you entered on an immigrant visa, while someone that adjusted or was never a permanent resident may still seek it. Or it being available because you got detained on entry (and therefore seeking admission) rather than just randomly somewhere too close to the border.

Due to the above I don't think he could seek 212(h) so it was COR or nothing.

This could be used as precedent to rollback the arbitrariness of USCIS enforcement in the future.

Definitely not with the current SCOTUS makeup, but this can definitely be the case for future SCOTUS.

Good but they also need to re-vote on the eDACA.

still never giving up, you have the spirit of a true Dreamer!

Waiting since 2001.