The Supreme Courtlast week agreed to review the Ninth Circuit's decision in Thuraissigiam v. U.S. Dep't of Homeland Sec.I wrote about the case in a March post captioned "Ninth Circuit Rules Expedited Removal Review Violates the Constitution: Expect more appeals, fewer negative credible fear findings, and more entries". The Supreme Court's ultimate decision, regardless of how it rules, will have significant ramifications for the administration's attempts to expand expedited removal.
The alien in that case, a Sri Lankan national, entered the United States illegally on February 17, 2017, and was arrested by a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officer 25 yards north of the border. He was placed in expedited removal proceedings, and referred for a credible fear interview with an asylum officer after he claimed a fear of persecution. His credible fear claim was denied, and he requested a review of that decision by the immigration court. The immigration judge subsequently affirmed the asylum officer's negative credible fear determination.
Thuraissigiam then filed a petition for habeas corpus with the district court, which was dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction in accordance with the statute governing judicial review of expedited removal orders, section 242(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) . The district court also rejected his constitutional claims under the suspension clause, discussed below.
The alien's petition for review to the circuit court asserted that the credible fear screening he was provided by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) deprived him "of a meaningful right to apply for asylum" and protection under article 3 of the Convention against Torture (CAT). He also asserted that the asylum officer and immigration judge violated his due process rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.
Specifically, the alien alleged that the asylum officer had "failed to 'elicit all relevant and useful information bearing on whether [he had] a credible fear of persecution or torture.'" He also alleged that there were "communication problems" between him, the asylum officer, and the translator, as well as similar issues during the credible fear review hearing before the immigration court. Finally, Thuraissigiam claimed that he did not know whether the information he had given to the asylum officer and immigration judge "would be shared with the Sri Lankan government."
The statute governing judicial review in expedited removal proceedings strictly limits the scope of the questions the Article III court can consider and the relief it can grant. In particular, it allows review in habeas corpus proceedings, but this review is limited to determining whether the petitioner for habeas corpus is an alien, whether the petitioner was removed under the expedited removal provisions of the INA, and whether the petitioner could "prove by a preponderance of the evidence that [he or she] is an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence", a refugee, or an asylee.
The circuit court concluded that this statute violated the Suspension Clause of the U.S. Constitution. That clause, Article I, Section 9, Clause 2 of the Constitution states: "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." The circuit court described the procedural protections in the judicial review provisions governing expedited removal cases as "meager", and found that that this was "compounded by the fact that" the review provision "prevents any judicial review of whether DHS complied with the procedures in an individual case, or applied the correct legal standards."
It should be noted that Congress went to great pains to limit the availability of judicial review of expedited removal determinations, consistent with the "expedited" nature of those proceedings. Simply put, Congress expected that aliens who entered the United States illegally would be quickly returned (with extremely limited exceptions), not that their cases would linger in the courts for years.
It is not a surprise that the Supreme Court agreed to hear this case for a number of reasons (including the clear restriction on the review authority of Article III courts from expedited removal proceedings set forth in the relevant statute), but perhaps the most significant is the fact that Thuraissigiam created a "circuit-split", that is, a disagreement with a decision in a different circuit, a fact I alluded to in my March 2019 post.
Specifically, in finding that the suspension clause was violated by the review procedures Congress had allowed in expedited-removal cases, the Ninth Circuit explicitly rejected the analysis of the Third Circuit in Castro v. U.S. Dep't of Homeland Sec., which I described in significant detail in an April 2017 post.
The Third Circuit there held that 28 different petitioners could not invoke the Constitution because each was apprehended shortly after entry, and therefore deemed an alien seeking initial admission to the United States, limiting their constitutional rights. In April 2017, the Supreme Court rejected a petition for writ of certiorari filed by the petitioners in that case.
Thuraissigiam has not yet been set for argument. The Court's decision, however, will have significant ramifications with respect to the appeals rights of aliens in expedited removal proceedings.
This is especially true if the September 27, 2019, injunction issued by Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson of the U.S. District for the District of Columbia is stayed or dissolved. That injunction blocked an attempt by DHS to expand expedited removal under section 235(b) of the INA to any alien who is apprehended after entering the United States without admission or parole and who has not been physically present in the United States for two years, in accordance with authority provided by Congress under section 235(b)(1)(A)(iii)(II) of the INA.
Should the Supreme Court find that the judicial review limitations in section 242(e) of the INA satisfy the constitutional rights of an alien like Thuraissigiam, who was apprehended shortly after he entered the United States, the question will then be whether they also satisfy the constitutional rights of an alien who has been in the United States for just less than two years. It is doubtful that the Court will directly answer this question even if it reverses the Ninth Circuit (and Judge Jackson's injunction is no longer in effect), but it will likely provide clues as to its ultimate conclusions on the issue.
Read more:
SCOTUS to Review Appeals of Credible-Fear Denials - Immigration Blog
- Fifth Amendment - The Text, Origins, and Meaning of the ... - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- 5th Amendment - Revolutionary War and Beyond - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution ... - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Justices suggest public employees' testimony is protected - April 29th, 2014 [April 29th, 2014]
- HST 330 fifth amendment presentation - Video - May 1st, 2014 [May 1st, 2014]
- Police not sure if Sioux City murder suspect invoked 5th Amendment rights - May 3rd, 2014 [May 3rd, 2014]
- Christie Ally Samson Refuses to Give Documents to Lawmakers - May 4th, 2014 [May 4th, 2014]
- House votes to hold ex-IRS official in contempt - May 8th, 2014 [May 8th, 2014]
- House votes to hold ex-IRS official Lois Lerner in contempt of Congress - May 8th, 2014 [May 8th, 2014]
- House holds Lois Lerner in contempt - May 8th, 2014 [May 8th, 2014]
- House votes to hold former IRS official in contempt - May 8th, 2014 [May 8th, 2014]
- Articles about Fifth Amendment - Los Angeles Times - May 9th, 2014 [May 9th, 2014]
- Former PA Chairman Samson Pleads Fifth - Video - May 9th, 2014 [May 9th, 2014]
- GOP-led House votes to hold former IRS official in contempt - May 12th, 2014 [May 12th, 2014]
- No plans to arrest Lois Lerner, John Boehner says - May 13th, 2014 [May 13th, 2014]
- Im not going to testify: Witness pleads Fifth Amendment during Bangor triple murder trial - May 13th, 2014 [May 13th, 2014]
- Attorney: Defense told Corso will take Fifth - May 16th, 2014 [May 16th, 2014]
- Spokane County workers use Fifth Amendment in back-dating case - Thu, 22 May 2014 PST - May 22nd, 2014 [May 22nd, 2014]
- Shawn Vestal: County permit clerical mishap raises eyebrows - Fri, 23 May 2014 PST - May 23rd, 2014 [May 23rd, 2014]
- Sexual abuse measure could lead to wrongful convictions, attorneys say - August 31st, 2014 [August 31st, 2014]
- 5th Amendment - Laws.com - August 31st, 2014 [August 31st, 2014]
- Wildstein takes the 5th - Video - August 31st, 2014 [August 31st, 2014]
- Fifth Amendment (United States Constitution ... - September 2nd, 2014 [September 2nd, 2014]
- New bill a powerful tool to imprison sex offenders - September 3rd, 2014 [September 3rd, 2014]
- Cristin Milioti in The Good Wife - Julianna Margulies - Video - September 4th, 2014 [September 4th, 2014]
- Kansas Supreme Court: Grand jury violated man's Fifth Amendment rights - September 6th, 2014 [September 6th, 2014]
- Attorney Gwendolyn Solomon Petitions United States Supreme Court to Review Tenth Circuits Decision in Case of the IRP6 - September 9th, 2014 [September 9th, 2014]
- Texas man's conviction overturned because of Fifth Amendment violation - September 10th, 2014 [September 10th, 2014]
- Cop Says 'You Must Be Doing Something Wrong if You Invoke Your Rights' (Video) - September 12th, 2014 [September 12th, 2014]
- Public be damned Litchfield latest example - September 14th, 2014 [September 14th, 2014]
- Volokh Conspiracy: What the posse comitatus case might mean for the future of the exclusionary rule - September 15th, 2014 [September 15th, 2014]
- Fifth Amendment - Video - September 15th, 2014 [September 15th, 2014]
- Top 5 Constitution-Related Searches at FindLaw.com - September 19th, 2014 [September 19th, 2014]
- The Fifth Amendment Eminent Domain - Video - September 19th, 2014 [September 19th, 2014]
- Apple And Google Will Force A Legal Battle Over The Privacy Of Your Passcode - September 20th, 2014 [September 20th, 2014]
- Civics- The Fifth Amendment (Sarah Hutchinson) - Video - September 20th, 2014 [September 20th, 2014]
- Google and Apple Wont Unlock Your Phone, But a Court Can Make You Do It - September 22nd, 2014 [September 22nd, 2014]
- GOP fumes over Lerner remarks - September 23rd, 2014 [September 23rd, 2014]
- Assistant to DeKalb CEO Ellis invokes 5th Amendment 30 times - September 23rd, 2014 [September 23rd, 2014]
- GOP fumes as Lois Lerner talks to press but snubs Congress - September 24th, 2014 [September 24th, 2014]
- Cry us a river, Lois Lerner - September 24th, 2014 [September 24th, 2014]
- Can You Go to Jail for Refusing to Testify? - September 25th, 2014 [September 25th, 2014]
- Fifth Amendment Projectb - Video - September 25th, 2014 [September 25th, 2014]
- The Commander Cody Band - Take The Fifth Amendment - 8/5/1977 - Convention Hall (Official) - Video - September 27th, 2014 [September 27th, 2014]
- Joey Gallo Takes The Fifth Amendment - Video - September 29th, 2014 [September 29th, 2014]
- Batavia High School teacher John Dryden retires from school district - October 3rd, 2014 [October 3rd, 2014]
- Batavia High School teacher John Dryden retires - October 4th, 2014 [October 4th, 2014]
- The Fifth Amendment Please Don't Leave Me Now - Video - October 6th, 2014 [October 6th, 2014]
- Man Denied Fifth Amendment While In Court Wearing Anti-Police Shirt, Still Won His Case (Video) - October 7th, 2014 [October 7th, 2014]
- Batavia teacher previously involved in Fifth Amendment dispute retires - October 7th, 2014 [October 7th, 2014]
- INFORMUCATE: THE FIFTH AMENDMENT - Video - October 8th, 2014 [October 8th, 2014]
- Fairholme Funds Appeals Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Verdict - October 10th, 2014 [October 10th, 2014]
- Fresno Police Officer violated fifth amendment at a dui checkpoint. - Video - October 10th, 2014 [October 10th, 2014]
- Code cases: Police want phone access, but some pass - October 12th, 2014 [October 12th, 2014]
- Fresno Police Officer violated fifth amendment at a dui checkpoint. part 2 - Video - October 12th, 2014 [October 12th, 2014]
- Property Rights | Century Law Group - Video - October 20th, 2014 [October 20th, 2014]
- Agents questioned, Askar takes the Fifth in Trombetta hearing - October 21st, 2014 [October 21st, 2014]
- Scott and Crist have heated and personal final debate before November election - October 22nd, 2014 [October 22nd, 2014]
- Detective dodges questions about allegations made during rape investigation - October 25th, 2014 [October 25th, 2014]
- Disciplinary hearing for SB officer moved to later date - Video - October 27th, 2014 [October 27th, 2014]
- Judge Rules Suspect Can Be Required To Unlock Phone With Fingerprint - October 31st, 2014 [October 31st, 2014]
- Virginia judge: Police can demand a suspect unlock a phone with a fingerprint - October 31st, 2014 [October 31st, 2014]
- Court rules: Touch ID is not protected by the Fifth Amendment but Passcodes are - October 31st, 2014 [October 31st, 2014]
- Virginia Court: LEOs Can Force You To Provide Fingerprint To Unlock Your Phone - November 1st, 2014 [November 1st, 2014]
- Civil Rights and Civil Liberties - Fifth Amendment - Shh! The Right to Remain Silent - Video - November 1st, 2014 [November 1st, 2014]
- Your Fingerprints Belong To Us: Iphone Users Forfeit 5th Amendment - Video - November 2nd, 2014 [November 2nd, 2014]
- All Your Fingerprints Are Belong To Us: iPhone Users Forfeit Fifth Amendment - Video - November 2nd, 2014 [November 2nd, 2014]
- Log into Tax-News+ - November 4th, 2014 [November 4th, 2014]
- Editorial: Applying the Fifth Amendment in the era of smartphones - November 4th, 2014 [November 4th, 2014]
- Volokh Conspiracy: Virginia state trial court ruling on the Fifth Amendment and smart phones - November 4th, 2014 [November 4th, 2014]
- Fingerprints: iPhone Users Forfeit Fifth Amendment. - Video - November 4th, 2014 [November 4th, 2014]
- New ruling may affect police access to smartphones - Video - November 6th, 2014 [November 6th, 2014]
- Why the Constitution Can Protect Passwords But Not Fingerprint Scans - November 7th, 2014 [November 7th, 2014]
- Virginia state trial court ruling on the Fifth Amendment ... - November 7th, 2014 [November 7th, 2014]
- Is taking the fifth amendment a bad idea? - Video - November 7th, 2014 [November 7th, 2014]
- IT Security TV Show 4 November 2014 - iPhone Users Forfeit Fifth Amendment - Video - November 7th, 2014 [November 7th, 2014]
- the fifth amendment happy parody project song for connections - Video - November 8th, 2014 [November 8th, 2014]
- 13-year-olds murder conviction overturned - November 11th, 2014 [November 11th, 2014]
- Your Fifth Amendment Rights DO NOT Cover Biometrics - Video - November 11th, 2014 [November 11th, 2014]
- Philadelphia charter school officials pleaded Fifth 77 times - November 12th, 2014 [November 12th, 2014]