Supreme Court of the United States
Judulang v. Holder
December 12, 2011565 U.S. 42
Summary
The Supreme Court held that the Board of Immigration Appeals' (BIA) 'comparable-grounds' rule for determining eligibility for § 212(c) discretionary relief in deportation cases is arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act. The Court reasoned that the rule hinges eligibility on irrelevant statutory comparisons rather than factors related to the alien's fitness to remain, creating arbitrary outcomes dependent on charging decisions. The Court reversed the Ninth Circuit's decision upholding the policy, noting the BIA must provide a reasoned explanation for its actions.
Holding
- Whether the BIA's comparable-grounds rule is arbitrary and capricious under the APA.. The comparable-grounds rule is arbitrary and capricious.
Docket 10-694
Cited authorities
- 8 U.S.C. § 1229a
- 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101
- 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii)
- 8 U.S.C. §§ 1182
- 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101
- 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii)
- 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101
- CA11
Cited by
- Nak Kim Chhoeun and Mony Neth v. David…
- Stoll III v. Cowan
- Brito v. Barr
- Greater Boston Legal Services v. United States Department of Homeland Security
- American Stewards of Liberty, Charles Shell, Cheryl Shell, Walter Sidney Shell Management Trust, Kathryn Heidemann…
- Sharma Ramnarine, Also Known as Seenath Ragoobar Aruna Raymond, Also Known as Aruna Ramnarine, Also Known as Aruna…
- Billy Edward Armstrong and Phoebe J. Armstrong, Petitioners v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
- Billy Edward Armstrong and Phoebe J. Armstrong v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue