If a new legal standard applies to a case previously determined, immigration judges can contradict earlier decisions. A panel of judges from the Fifth Circuit court affirmed the judge’s ability in the review of a deportation case.

In the case, an individual was deported based on the conviction of an offense that was determined to be a ‘particularly serious crime’ under the Immigration and Nationality Act. As such, the individual was deported. Subsequently, the individual re-entered the U.S., claiming asylum due to threats to their lives in their home country.

In a subsequent review of their case, a judge found that the previous conviction did not qualify as a particularly serious crime, and as such, deportation was not warranted. The individual was granted asylum but not protection from deportation, as the person requested. The person was again deported and applied again for asylum. The judge in this most recent effort found the previously convicted crime does qualify as serious and therefore, was not granted asylum. At that point, the individual filed an appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).

Upon review by the BIA, the most recent finding was upheld. The panel of judges stated the case laws had changed between each filing and therefore, previous findings can be overturned. As such, the individual was not granted asylum or access to the United States.

If you have questions about your immigration-related issue, contact us at ILBSG. We continue to monitor ongoing policy and legal findings to ensure our clients get the right advice.

BIA Board of Immigration Appeals