The U.S. Supreme Court determined that federal courts may not review factual findings when considering deportation relief requests in immigration rulings. The Court was split in their decision that immigration officers’ findings are not to be included when considering requests to stop deportation efforts. The Court considered the case where an Indian national claims they inadvertently checked the American citizen box on a driver’s license application.
The individual entered the U.S. prior to being inspected. As a result, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) notified the person to appear in immigration court, with the potential to be removed from the U.S. due to lack of inspection. The immigration judge found that the person would face deportation. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) heard the matter and sided with the original findings of deportation. The individual then appealed the matter to the U.S. Court of Appeals.
A panel of judges serving on the 11th Circuit found that Congress had removed their jurisdiction to hear appeals of specific immigration rulings. As such, the circuit court found they could review BIA’s legal conclusions but could not consider BIA’s factual findings. Upon review of the legal conclusions, the Circuit court did not find any grounds to overturn the removal. They also found there was no ground to review the petition. The individual then took their case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Two key questions of the Supreme Court case included:
Whether federal courts can review matters of discretionary removal
Whether cases of misrepresentation as a U.S. citizen qualify as immaterial misrepresentation or not.
The Supreme Court found that federal courts are not able to review the factual findings of lower courts.
If you have questions about an immigration-related issue, contact us at ILBSG. We actively monitor ongoing policy and law proposals and findings to ensure our clients get the right advice.
