Ramiro Tula Rubio v. Loretta Lynch

I respectfully dissent from the denial of rehearing en banc. The panel here interpreted the Immigration and Naturalization Act’s important provision for cancellation of removal, 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a), in a way that is contrary to the Supreme Court, contrary to the BIA’s interpretations, contrary to case law, and contrary to major immigration treatises. The panel’s interpretation deprives the statutory phrase “in any status” of meaning. Moreover, by allowing this provision to cover aliens who were mistakenly admitted without legal status, the panel renders § 1229b(a) far broader than Congress…