Legal Opinion

Claudius ATKINSON, Appellant. v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF the UNITED STATES

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided March 8, 2007No. 05-1099PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ROTH, Circuit Judge.

If the Supreme Court has determined that the repeal of a law has an impermissible retroactive effect on a particular group, does that determination render the law impermissibly retroactive in its application to other groups affected by the repeal? That is the question before us in this appeal.

I. Factual Background and Procedural History

Claudius Atkinson is a citizen of Jamaica who entered the United States as a non- immigrant visitor in January 1983. He adjusted his status to that of lawful permanent resident two years later on January 25,1985. On December 16, 1991,…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Landgraf v. USI Film ProductsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  2. Lindh v. MurphySupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  3. Immigration & Naturalization Service v. St. CyrSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  4. Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States Ex Rel. SchumerSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  5. Fernandez-Vargas v. GonzalesSupreme Court of the United States · 2006

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Hernandez De Anderson v. GonzalesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
  2. Lovan v. HolderCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2009
  3. Gallimore v. Attorney General of the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2010
  4. Ahmed Bakran v. Secretary United States DepartCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2018
  5. ABDELGHANYBoard of Immigration Appeals · 2014

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API