Legal Opinion
Fragedela v. Thornburgh
District Court, W.D. Louisiana
Decided April 12, 1991No. Civ. A. 90-1243, 90-1250, 90-1253, 90-1314, 90-1320, 90-1321, 90-1327, 90-1339, 90-1345, 90-1348, 90-1349, 90-1364, 90-1413, 90-1415, 90-1417, 90-1424, 90-1425, 90-1458, 90-1459, 90-1462, 90-1465, 90-1472, 90-1478, 90-1625, 90-1631, 90-1638, 90-1645, 90-1699, 90-1710 and 90-1793PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING
LITTLE, District Judge.
Each petitioner is a Cuban national who came to the United States in 1980 during the Mariel boatlift. The Immigration and Naturalization Service detained petitioner upon his arrival at the United States border and eventually decided to exclude him from admission into the country. 8 U.S.C. § 1226. De jure petitioner has never entered this country. De facto he is physically present and living in this country on parole. 1 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(13).
Under the statutory scheme, whenever the INS renders a formal order of exclusion, it is to deport the alien to the country…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Plyler v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Jones v. CunninghamSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Shaughnessy v. United States Ex Rel. MezeiSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Lopez-MendozaSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Landon v. PlasenciaSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- In Re CubanDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1993
- Gaitan-Campanioni v. ThornburghDistrict Court, E.D. Texas · 1991