Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

10-1411, 10-2532 & 10-3333 Torres-Tristan v. Holder

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//September 1, 2011//

10-1411, 10-2532 & 10-3333 Torres-Tristan v. Holder

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//September 1, 2011//

Listen to this article

Immigration
U visas; judicial review

The court does not have jurisdiction to review the denial of a petition for a U visa.

“The rule Torres- Tristan advocates here would, if adopted, create a new opportunity for an inadmissible alien subject to expedited removal to slow down the entire process by applying for a U Visa and a waiver of inadmissibility, and then to seek and obtain judicial review of those denials, no matter how weak the applications and challenges might be. See generally Kashani v. Nelson, 793 F.2d 818, 824-25 (7th Cir. 1986) (acknowledging congressional intent to expedite and consolidate review). We do not have jurisdiction to review the denial of Torres- Tristan’s application for a waiver of inadmissibility or his petition for a U Visa.

Dismissed.

10-1411, 10-2532 & 10-3333 Torres-Tristan v. Holder

Petitions for Review of Orders of the Department of Homeland Security, Hamilton, J.

Full Text

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests