In re Mendoza-Sandino

39 Cited authorities

Lindh v. Murphy
521 U.S. 320 (1997) Cited 11,177 times 29 Legal Analyses
Holding that the statutory language must be "so clear that it [can] sustain only one interpretation" favoring retroactivity
Landgraf v. USI Film Prods.
511 U.S. 244 (1994) Cited 3,865 times 34 Legal Analyses
Holding that a statute may apply retroactively when "clear congressional intent favor such a result"
United States v. Gaubert
499 U.S. 315 (1991) Cited 2,434 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the discretionary function exception only protects actions “grounded in the policy of the regulatory regime”
Lassiter v. Department of Social Services
452 U.S. 18 (1981) Cited 3,701 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that whether the Due Process Clause requires the appointment of counsel is considered on a case-by-case basis
INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca
480 U.S. 421 (1987) Cited 2,409 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that the phrase "well-founded fear," which is also found in 8 U.S.C. § 1101, is ambiguous
Reno v. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Com
525 U.S. 471 (1999) Cited 1,089 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "an alien unlawfully in this country has no constitutional right to assert selective enforcement as a defense against his deportation"
Reno v. Catholic Social Services, Inc.
509 U.S. 43 (1993) Cited 678 times
Holding that claims of immigrants who never applied for amnesty, challenging alleged mistakes made in administration of amnesty provision, were not ripe
Lorillard v. Pons
434 U.S. 575 (1978) Cited 1,129 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that the presumption of legislative ratification attaches where there is “an administrative or judicial interpretation of a statute,” and Congress “re-enacts statute without change”
Hughes Aircraft v. U.S. ex Rel. Schumer
520 U.S. 939 (1997) Cited 538 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that the presumption against retroactivity must apply “unless Congress has clearly manifested its intent to the contrary”
Kungys v. United States
485 U.S. 759 (1988) Cited 704 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the government must meet its burden with "clear, unequivocal, and convincing" evidence
Section 1182 - Inadmissible aliens
8 U.S.C. § 1182 Cited 9,904 times 69 Legal Analyses
Holding deportable aliens who have been convicted of "crimes involving moral turpitude"
Section 1229b - Cancellation of removal; adjustment of status
8 U.S.C. § 1229b Cited 5,204 times 24 Legal Analyses
Granting the Attorney General discretion to cancel the removal of an alien who has “been battered or subjected to extreme cruelty by a ... parent who is ... a United States citizen”
Section 1255 - Adjustment of status of nonimmigrant to that of person admitted for permanent residence
8 U.S.C. § 1255 Cited 2,894 times 6 Legal Analyses
Listing classes of nonimmigrants, such as students and tourists
Section 1251 - Transferred
8 U.S.C. § 1251 Cited 2,159 times 1 Legal Analyses
Delineating crimes that make alien deportable
Section 1254 - Repealed
8 U.S.C. § 1254 Cited 1,132 times 1 Legal Analyses
Describing suspension-of-deportation eligibility
Section 1255a - Adjustment of status of certain entrants before January 1, 1982, to that of person admitted for lawful residence
8 U.S.C. § 1255a Cited 317 times
Establishing QDE's
Section 1.1 - Applicability
8 C.F.R. § 1.1 Cited 158 times
Providing that LPR status terminates upon the entry of a final order of removal
Section 212.3 - Application for the exercise of discretion under section 212(c)
8 C.F.R. § 212.3 Cited 43 times
Codifying the interpretation upheld in Castillo-Felix
Section 239.2 - Cancellation of notice to appear
8 C.F.R. § 239.2 Cited 34 times
Allowing an officer to dismiss a case after proceedings have begun on the same grounds

In re Mendoza-Sandino

39 Cited authorities

Holding that the statutory language must be "so clear that it [can] sustain only one interpretation" favoring retroactivity

Holding that a statute may apply retroactively when "clear congressional intent favor such a result"

Holding that the discretionary function exception only protects actions “grounded in the policy of the regulatory regime”

Holding that whether the Due Process Clause requires the appointment of counsel is considered on a case-by-case basis

Holding that the phrase "well-founded fear," which is also found in 8 U.S.C. § 1101, is ambiguous

Holding that "an alien unlawfully in this country has no constitutional right to assert selective enforcement as a defense against his deportation"

Holding that claims of immigrants who never applied for amnesty, challenging alleged mistakes made in administration of amnesty provision, were not ripe

Holding that the presumption of legislative ratification attaches where there is “an administrative or judicial interpretation of a statute,” and Congress “re-enacts statute without change”

Holding that the presumption against retroactivity must apply “unless Congress has clearly manifested its intent to the contrary”

Holding that the government must meet its burden with "clear, unequivocal, and convincing" evidence

Holding deportable aliens who have been convicted of "crimes involving moral turpitude"

Granting the Attorney General discretion to cancel the removal of an alien who has “been battered or subjected to extreme cruelty by a ... parent who is ... a United States citizen”

Listing classes of nonimmigrants, such as students and tourists

Delineating crimes that make alien deportable

Describing suspension-of-deportation eligibility

Establishing QDE's

Providing that LPR status terminates upon the entry of a final order of removal

Codifying the interpretation upheld in Castillo-Felix

Allowing an officer to dismiss a case after proceedings have begun on the same grounds