Categories: SCOTUS Watch

SCOTUS Ruling In Pereira v. Sessions Gives Hope To Thousands of Non-Citizens

Individuals now have a new way to challenge their removal proceedings.

In an 8-1 ruling, the Supreme Court of the United States held that “a putative notice sent to a nonpermanent resident to appear at a removal proceeding that fails to designate a specific time or place for that proceeding does not end the continuous residence period calculation necessary for possible cancellation of the individual’s removal.”

An applicant for cancellation of removal must accrue ten years of continuous physical presence, along with certain other factors, to qualify for relief from removal. The statute states that when the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issues a notice to appear (“NTA”) for removal proceedings, the NTA stops the accrual of a non-citizen’s ten years of continuous physical presence.

However, 8 U.S.C. 1229(a), defines the NTA as a notice that provides specific information, including “the time and place at which the proceedings will be held.” In practice, a huge majority of NTAs that are served on non-citizens to initiate removal proceedings never include the time and place of the removal proceedings.

Pereira was shy of the ten year continuous residence requirement when he received a notice from the DHS placing him in removal proceedings. Given that Pereira’s NTA did not contain the time and place of the removal proceedings, the Supreme Court held that the issuance of an NTA to him did not trigger the stop-time rule, which rendered him ineligible for cancellation of removal. Therefore, even after receiving this deficient notice, Pereira continued to accrue time towards presence in the United States. As such, Pereira should be able to reopen his immigration court case and apply for cancellation of removal, which if granted, would give him lawful permanent residence status.

This ruling could have huge ramifications for thousands of individuals, including persons who are currently in proceedings and persons who have been ordered deported. If the Supreme Court defines an NTA as a document that must have the time and place of proceedings in all circumstances, most people in removal proceedings now can challenge the NTA as deficient and move to terminate proceedings.

While the DHS can always file a new and corrected NTA, it does buy a person in removal proceedings time, and may help tremendously with case completion rates, a purported goal of the Department of Justice.

We look forward to using this new decision to assist as many people as possible.

Prerna Lal

Immigration Attorney

Share
Published by
Prerna Lal

Recent Posts

Post-Election Blues – What To Do Now?

There's a silver-lining here for immigration advocates. We have always known that the Democrats will…

2 months ago

New Benefit: DED for Lebanon

On July 26, 2024, President Joseph Biden issued a Memorandum on the Deferred Enforced Departure…

4 months ago

Keeping Families Together Parole-In-Place Resources

On June 18, 2024, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced a key step toward…

4 months ago

Biden Parole In Place Program Begins August 19, 2024

USCIS is not currently accepting applications under this process. Applications will be available and accepted…

5 months ago

Chevron is Dead

The end of Chevron deference is a significant development for immigration law. With Chevron deference…

6 months ago

Biden Announces Two Executive Actions On Immigration To Begin Later This Summer

Today, the Biden Administration teased two new proposals to address the real challenges of our…

6 months ago