• Hours & Info

    (562) 495-0554
    M-F: 8:00am - 6:00 p.m.
    Sat: 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
  • Past Blog Posts

  • https://api.whatsapp.com/send?phone=13104885414

Court Says INA §242(a)(2)(C)’s Jurisdictional Provision Does Not Apply Where Removal Order Is Based Solely on Unlawful Presence’

The Second Circuit held that INA §242(a)(2)(C)’s jurisdictional provision applies only to cases in which the immigration judge has found a petitioner removable based on covered criminal activity and does not apply where the petitioner’s order of removal is based solely on unlawful presence.

Court Holds Asylum Seekers Have Constitutional Right to Federal Court Review of Expedited Removal Orders

The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s dismissal of the habeas petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, holding that 8 USC §1252(e)(2) violates the Suspension Clause as applied to the petitioner, and remanded the case for the district court to exercise jurisdiction to consider the petitioner’s legal challenges to the procedures leading to his expedited removal order.

Waiver Application

The Seventh Circuit dismissed in part and denied in part the petition for review, holding that it lacked jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary decision to deny the Bosnian Serb petitioner’s application for a waiver of removal under INA §237(a)(1)(H). Accordingly, the court upheld the BIA’s determination that the petitioner, who had failed to disclose his participation as a combatant in the Bosnian conflict during the 1990s when he applied for refugee status, was removable based on fraud.

Fee waiver

Fraud waiver

New waiver

Waivers

Court Says It Lacks Jurisdiction to Review Denial of Bosnian Petitioner’s §237(a)(1)(H) Waiver Application

The Seventh Circuit dismissed in part and denied in part the petition for review, holding that it lacked jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary decision to deny the Bosnian Serb petitioner’s application for a waiver of removal under INA §237(a)(1)(H). Accordingly, the court upheld the BIA’s determination that the petitioner, who had failed to disclose his participation as a combatant in the Bosnian conflict during the 1990s when he applied for refugee status, was removable based on fraud.

Jurisdiction denied

The Eighth Circuit held that the non-LPR petitioner’s claim that the IJ and BIA failed to consider all the evidence of exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his children, and that this failure constituted a denial of due process and an incorrect application of the hardship standard, was a challenge as to how the IJ and BIA weighed the evidence in support of his application for cancellation of removal, and was thus outside the court’s jurisdiction to review.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/jurisdiction/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/denied/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/jurisdiction-of-appellate-court/

https://californiaimmigration.us/the-best-immigration-attorney-can-represent-and-help-you-anywhere-in-the-u-s/