- Court: United States Supreme Court
- Area(s) of Law: Immigration
- Date Filed: April 23, 2020
- Case #: 18-725
- Judge(s)/Court Below: KAVANAUGH, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and THOMAS, ALITO, and GORSUCH, JJ., joined. SOTOMAYOR, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which GINSBURG, BREYER, and KAGAN, JJ., joined.
- Full Text Opinion
A U.S. immigration judge found Petitioner removable due to convictions for firearms and drug offenses. Petitioner applied for cancellation of removal but the court found him not eligible for cancellation due to an aggravated assault offense within seven years of being admitted to the United States. Petitioner appealed and argued that the crime which results in ineligibility for cancellation of removal must be one of the offenses of removal. The Board of Immigration Appeals and the Eleventh Circuit disagreed with Petitioner and affirmed the ruling of the immigration judge. The United States Supreme Court held that the offense which disqualifies a permanent legal resident from eligibility for cancellation of removal does not have to be on the list of more serious, “deportable” offenses listed in 8 U.S.C. §1227(a)(2) which triggers a removal action. A permanent legal resident who has committed any of the less serious offenses under 8 U.S.C. §1182(a)(2), within seven years of admittance to the U.S., is ineligible for cancellation of removal. The Court compared the statute establishing eligibility requirements, 8 U.S.C. §1229b(a), to recidivist sentencing statues in which an offender’s previous crimes are considered. The Court reasoned that, like any other recidivist statute, a noncitizen’s earlier crimes may be considered, in addition to the offense which provided the grounds for the removal action. AFFIRMED