The U.S. Supreme Court is set to make a crucial decision on appeal deadlines for noncitizens facing deportation, potentially altering the landscape of immigration law.
At a Glance
- Supreme Court to review 30-day appeal window for noncitizens contesting removal orders
- Case involves Pierre Riley, a Jamaican national who missed the appeal deadline
- Decision could resolve conflicting rulings between circuit courts
- Ruling may impact countless noncitizens relying on deadline extension practices
- Court to determine if the 30-day appeal timeline is jurisdictional or a claims-processing rule
Supreme Court to Address Circuit Split on Deportation Appeals
In a move that could significantly impact immigration law, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case of Velazquez v. Garland on November 12, 2024. This case aims to resolve a circuit split regarding the deadline for voluntary departure of noncitizens and the interpretation of appeal timelines in deportation cases.
The case centers around Pierre Yassue Nashun Riley, a Jamaican national who missed the 30-day appeal deadline for a final removal order. Riley claims he has a credible fear of persecution if deported, which could make him eligible for protection under the United Nations Convention Against Torture (CAT).
Conflicting Circuit Court Rulings
The heart of the issue lies in conflicting rulings between the Tenth and Ninth Circuits. The Tenth Circuit has held that the voluntary-departure deadline does not extend, even if it falls on a weekend or holiday. In contrast, the Ninth Circuit allows for an extension to the next business day.
“The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit held that, regardless of what day of the week a voluntary-departure period expires, the law requires a noncitizen moving to reopen or reconsider removal proceedings to file within the calendar-day period set in the voluntary departure order.” – U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
This discrepancy has created uncertainty in the application of immigration law across different jurisdictions, potentially affecting the rights and opportunities of countless noncitizens facing deportation.
Implications of the Supreme Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court’s ruling in this case could have far-reaching consequences for immigration law and policy. It will not only resolve the circuit split but also clarify the nature of the 30-day appeal timeline – whether it is jurisdictional or merely a claims-processing rule.
“The US Supreme Court will consider if federal appeals courts can review appeals from non-citizens claiming they’ll be killed or tortured if deported that are filed more than 30 days after a removal order is issued.” – Pierre Riley
If the Court rules that the deadline is jurisdictional, it could severely limit the ability of noncitizens to appeal deportation orders after the 30-day window. On the other hand, if it’s deemed a claims-processing rule, it may provide more flexibility in considering late appeals under certain circumstances.
Potential Impact on Noncitizens and Immigration Policy
The decision could affect numerous noncitizens who have relied on the practice of extending deadlines to the next business day. It may also influence how immigration courts and federal agencies interpret and apply filing deadlines in the future.
“He said the appeals court was wrong to hold the 30-day deadline is both jurisdictional and begins as soon as the immigration officer ordered him removed.” – Pierre Riley
This case highlights the complex interplay between immigration law, administrative procedures, and individual rights. As the nation grapples with ongoing immigration challenges, the Supreme Court’s decision will likely have significant implications for how deportation cases are handled and appealed in the future.
Sources:
- U.S. Supreme Court to Consider Circuit Split on Voluntary-Departure Deadline
- Supreme Court to Review 30-Day Appeal Window in Immigration Removal Case
