R-S-C v. Sessions
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
EBEL, Circuit Judge.
There is an apparent conflict, which is squarely presented in this ease, between two provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The asylum section provides that “[a]ny alien ..., irrespective of such alien’s status, may apply for asy lum[.]” 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(1) (emphasis added). By contrast, the reinstatement provision mandates that a previously deported alien who illegally reenters the United States will have his prior removal order reinstated and “is not eligible and may not apply for any relief....” Id. § 1231(a)(5) (emphasis added). Tasked with…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-FonsecaSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- National Cable & Telecommunications Assn. v. Brand X Internet ServicesSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Aguirre-AguirreSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Fernandez-Vargas v. GonzalesSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Bhaktibhai-Patel v. GarlandCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2022
- Lucio-Rayos v. SessionsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2017
- Bradford v. U.S. Department of LaborCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2024
- E. Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. BarrDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2019
- L-M-PBoard of Immigration Appeals · 2018
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.