The New York Times published an editorial on a recent U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed inconsistent policies applied in immigration law.
In Judulang v. Holder, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) had ruled that the petitioner, Joel Judulang, could be deported because he had been convicted of voluntary manslaughter (an aggravated felony) when he was 14 years old. Judulang, a native of the Philippines, had been a lawful permanent resident in the United States since 1974 when he was 8 years old. The BIA ruled that Judulang could not seek discretionary relief from deportation based on the application of "comparable-grounds" policy where an individual would be denied relief from deportation but allowed for relief for individuals who wanted to enter the country.
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that this policy is inconsistent and unlawful. Justice Elena Kagan wrote "We must reverse an agency policy when we cannot discern a reason for it" and that such a policy made deportation a "sport of chance...like flipping a coin - heads an alien may apply for relief, tails he may not."
Glickman Turley's experienced attorneys represent individuals on a wide range of immigration matters, as well as other legal issues. Please contact our attorneys if you wish to discuss representation on immigration matters, real estate purchase and sales, condominium associations, criminal defense, non-profit law, civil litigation, business litigation, business law, probate matters including wills, powers of attorney, health care proxy, same-sex parent adoptions, guardianships, animal law, or LGBT legal matters.
