Immigration – Removal Order

Listen to this article

United States Supreme Court

Case Name: Tae D. Johnson, et al., v. Maria Angelica Guzman Chavez, et al.,

Case No.: 19-897

Focus: Immigration – Removal Order

Federal immigration law contains various provisions authorizing the Government to detain aliens during the removal process. This case concerns two of them: 8 U. S. C. §1226 and 8 U. S. C. §1231. We are asked to decide which of those provisions applies to aliens who were removed from the United States but later reentered without authorization, were subject to reinstated orders of removal, and then sought withholding of removal based on fear of persecution in the particular countries designated by their removal orders. If the answer is §1226, which applies “pending a decision on whether the alien is to be removed from the United States,” then the alien may receive a bond hearing before an immigration judge. If the answer is §1231, which applies after the alien is “ordered removed,” then the alien is not entitled to a bond hearing. We conclude that §1231, not §1226, governs the detention of aliens subject to reinstated orders of removal, meaning those aliens are not entitled to a bond hearing while they pursue withholding of removal.

Reversed

Dissenting: BREYER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOTOMAYOR and KAGAN, JJ., joined.

Concurring: THOMAS, J., filed an opinion concurring except for footnote 4 and concurring in the judgment, in which GORSUCH, J., joined.

Full Text

Derek A Hawkins is Corporate Counsel, at Salesforce.