ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily




The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
© 1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 24

Thread: Reinstatement of Removal Order

  1. #1
    The recent Supreme Court decision of Fernandez-Vargas v. Gonzales, 2006 U.S. LEXIS 4892 (June 22, 2006), has caused great concern among many undocumented immigrants. The Supreme Court held that §241(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (Act) might be applied retroactively to individuals who were previously ordered deported and who reentered the United States before April 1, 1997 and did not take any steps to legalize his or her unlawful status in the U.S. before that section took effect. In Fernandez-Vargas, the petitioner was ordered deported in 1981 and reentered the U.S. illegally in 1982. He remained in the U.S. and started a trucking business. In 1989, he had a U.S. citizen child and married his son's mother in 2001. His U.S. citizen wife filed a relative visa petition on his behalf. In November of 2003, the Department of Homeland Security reinstated Fernandez-Vargas' 1981 deportation order and he was not allowed to adjust his status to that of a lawful permanent resident. He was subsequently removed to Juarez, Mexico.

  2. #2
    The recent Supreme Court decision of Fernandez-Vargas v. Gonzales, 2006 U.S. LEXIS 4892 (June 22, 2006), has caused great concern among many undocumented immigrants. The Supreme Court held that §241(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (Act) might be applied retroactively to individuals who were previously ordered deported and who reentered the United States before April 1, 1997 and did not take any steps to legalize his or her unlawful status in the U.S. before that section took effect. In Fernandez-Vargas, the petitioner was ordered deported in 1981 and reentered the U.S. illegally in 1982. He remained in the U.S. and started a trucking business. In 1989, he had a U.S. citizen child and married his son's mother in 2001. His U.S. citizen wife filed a relative visa petition on his behalf. In November of 2003, the Department of Homeland Security reinstated Fernandez-Vargas' 1981 deportation order and he was not allowed to adjust his status to that of a lawful permanent resident. He was subsequently removed to Juarez, Mexico.

  3. #3
    As someone noted before, this was not some sort of a 'landmark' decision by Supreme Court, rather it affirmed what was consistently held by BIA and Federal Appelate Courts in past.

  4. #4

  5. #5
    I concur with the decision, there could not be any other according to USCIS code.

    However, it is curious why he did not file petition before April 30, 2001 and file I485A and pay $1000?? Would CIS have forgiven his EWA even though he was ordered deported previously? Just a thought.

    Af the law is clear as you acknowledge,
    but do you agree with the decision in regards to the way you feel about family nucleus?

  6. #6
    What part of "ordered deported" did Fernancez-Vargas not understand (or chose not to understand)?

  7. #7
    Af the law is clear as you acknowledge,
    but do you agree with the decision in regards to the way you feel about family nucleus?
    What I know is that reentering US with outstanding order of deportation is FELONY.

    And I have never defended the rights of FELONS.

    But I vehemently opposed sections of HH4437 that would , among others, make AGGRAVATED FELONS out of ordinary overstays of visas with nuclear families in US who had no venues (under existing CAPs) to adjust their status or re-unite with their families in US sooner than in 6-10 years.


    IE

  8. #8
    To understand the impact of this case it is important to explain what §241(a)(5) of the Act is and whom it affects. Section 241(a)(5) of the Act allows the Attorney General to reinstate removal orders against aliens who have reentered the U.S. illegally after having been removed or having departed voluntarily, under an order of removal. The prior order of removal is reinstated from its original date and is not subject to being reopened or reviewed. The alien is not eligible and may not apply for any relief under the Act and may be removed under the prior order at any time after the reentry. Immigrants who return to the U.S. illegally after having been removed under a prior order of deportation, exclusion, or removal are subject to removal under §241(a)(5) unless an individual's case falls under a statutory or judicial exception: individuals applying for adjustment of status under the legalization program; Salvadoran, Guatemalan, and Eastern European applicants under NACARA; Nicaraguans and Cuban applicants for adjustment under §202 of the Act; and, Haitian applicants for adjustment under the Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act of 1998. Individuals in the Ninth Circuit (California and eight other Western states) who have filed an application for adjustment of status and application for permission to reapply for admission to the U.S. after deportation or removal prior to a reinstatement determination, may be judicially exempt from reinstatement of removal. Please note that only a legal professional, such as an experienced immigration attorney, can properly evaluate a person's case and determine whether the individual will be exempt.

    The Court's decision of Fernandez-Vargas affects every circuit differently. For instance, the case overturned the Ninth Circuit's decision in Castro-Cortez et al. v. INS, 239 F.3d 1037 (9th Cir. 2001), which held that Congress did not intend for §241(a)(5) to apply to individuals who reentered before April 1, 1997. The Fernandez-Vargas case also raised the issue of who can determine whether an individual is removable under §241(a)(5). In Morales-Izquiero v. Ashcroft, 388 F.3d 1299 (9th Cir. 2004), the Ninth Circuit held that only immigration judges can determine whether an individual is removable- the government requested a rehearing and this decision is currently pending. Currently, Department of Homeland Security Officers decide whether to reinstate a prior removal order.

    If you are served with a reinstatement of removal order you should immediately contact an immigration attorney. An attorney can assist in challenging the reinstatement of removal order. Reinstatement orders can be appealed to the circuit court having jurisdiction over the place the reinstatement order was issued. It is important to point out that the Court in Fernandez-Vargas did not decide whether §241(a)(5) can be applied retroactively to someone who did take affirmative steps to legalize their status, such as by filing an adjustment of status application, an immigrant visa petition, labor certification application, asylum application or Temporary Protected Status. Therefore, individuals who made affirmative steps towards legalizing their immigration status prior to April 1, 1997 should challenge the retroactive application of §241(a)(5). Furthermore, the Court in a footnote indicated that an individual subject to reinstatement of removal may seek withholding of removal which raises the possibility of asylum as a form of relief as well.

    Often times individuals are unaware of the existence of a prior removal order because he or she was ordered removed in absentia (failed to show up to court) or were removed in an expedited manner at the border.

  9. #9
    Good article, macyuhoo.

    Please note that only a legal professional, such as an experienced immigration attorney, can properly evaluate a person's case
    This is absolutely true.

  10. #10
    Someone12
    Guest
    deport or export all illegals. Thanks to the Court!!

Similar Threads

  1. Removal Order
    By Farkey in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-07-2009, 05:01 PM
  2. Humanitarian Reinstatement
    By mila in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 11-20-2008, 02:15 PM
  3. Should I still apply for reinstatement?
    By randam1 in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-09-2008, 01:31 AM
  4. humanitarian reinstatement
    By Aloha in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 10-26-2007, 01:21 PM
  5. Soon to be reported to SEVIS; F1 reinstatement possible?
    By Mat in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-18-2004, 10:43 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: