The federal government’s issuance of multiple notices to migrants advising them of removal proceedings is acceptable, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled. As such, in absentia removal orders cannot be rescinded if details around the date, time, and location of immigration court hearings are not sent in a single notice. In a 5-4 decision, the justices found that if the initial notice to appear, or the NTA, does not show the time and location, a second notice detailing that information is sufficient. If the individual does not appear in court after the documents are sent, the immigration judge has sufficient basis to order the removal of the immigrant.
In order to rescind removal orders, the individual must show they have not received either the initial notice, the Notice to Appear, or the subsequent written notice issued if there is a change to the hearing schedule. At the heart of the challenge is the word ‘or’. This ruling clarifies the application of the word.
The justices found that receipt of either notice counts as notification in accordance with the Immigration Nationality Act (INA). This resolves the Fifth and Ninth circuit courts who split on the ruling. This is the third time the Supreme Court reviewed the validity of NTAs in the last six years. In those reviews, the stop-time rule was under consideration.
The dissenting justices found that the text of the law ignores the court’s precedent findings. Further, it does not accurately include Congress’ requirement for ‘careful in absentia removal framework’.
As always, ILBSG actively monitors ongoing updates to U.S. immigration policy. If you have questions about any U.S. immigration related issue, contact us. We work with our clients in their specific situations to ensure they get the right advice.
