In Pereira v. Sessions, __ U.S. __, 138 S. Ct. 2105 (2018), the U.S. Supreme Court held that service of a putative charging document that does not specify the time and place of removal proceedings does not meet the statutory definition of a Notice to Appear (NTA) under 8 U.S.C. § 1229(a) and, therefore, does not cut off a noncitizen’s ability to accrue the time in the United States required to qualify for cancellation of removal. Although the government is attempting to cabin the ruling’s impact to the cancellation of removal context, practitioners can apply the rationale underlying the Court’s interpretation of § 1229(a) to a wider variety of challenges. Furthermore, practitioners can file motions to reconsider and/or reopen prior removal orders predicated on defective NTAs within 30 to 90 days of the decision or as soon as practicable after learning of the decision.
Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: motion to reconsider, motion to reopen, notice to appear, NTA, Pereira | Leave a comment »
