Case Law

It is likely that § 265 grants the Executive sweeping authority to prohibit aliens from entering the United States during a public-health emergency; that the Executive may expel aliens who violate such a prohibition; and that under § 1231(b)(3)(A) and the Convention Against Torture, the Executive cannot expel aliens to countries where their “life or freedom would be threatened” on account of their “race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion” or where they will likely face torture.

4 March 2022 | Judicial Body: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit | Topic(s): COVID-19 - Deportation / Forcible return - Expulsion - Public health | Countries: United States of America

For UNHCR’s intervention at the district court level, see the Brief of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees as Amicus Curaie in Support of Plaintiff’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment in case Grace, et. al., Plaintiffs, v. Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III, in his Official Capacity as Attorney General of the United States, et. al., Defendants. For UNHCR’s intervention in this case, see Brief of Amicus Curiae United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in Support of Plaintiffs-Appellees in case Grace, et. al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. William P. Barr, Attorney General, et. al., Defendants-Appellants. From the Court: "Twelve asylum seekers challenge a host of executive-branch policies adopted to implement the expedited-removal provisions of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA), [...]. Broadly speaking, the challenged policies concern how asylum officers determine whether an alien has demonstrated a “credible fear” of persecution, a threshold showing that permits an alien who would otherwise be immediately deported to seek asylum in the United States. The asylum seekers principally argue that the policies raise the bar for demonstrating a credible fear of persecution far above what Congress intended and that the Attorney General and various agencies violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), [...] by failing to adequately address important factors bearing on the policies’ adoption. Largely on these grounds, the district court found the policies inconsistent with IIRIRA, the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), [...] seq., and the APA, and enjoined their enforcement. For the reasons set forth in this opinion, we affirm in part and reverse in part."

20 May 2021 | Judicial Body: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit | Topic(s): Agents of persecution - Burden of proof - State protection | Countries: United States of America

11 August 2020 | Judicial Body: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | Topic(s): Domestic violence - Non-state agents of persecution - Social group persecution - Women-at-risk | Countries: Mexico - United States of America

7 August 2020 | Judicial Body: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | Topic(s): Domestic violence - Non-state agents of persecution - Social group persecution - Women-at-risk | Countries: Guatemala - United States of America

The Applicants challenge the validity and the constitutionality of the legislation implementing the Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America For Cooperation in the Examination of Refugee Status Claims from Nationals of Third Countries (referred to as the “Safe Third Country Agreement” or “STCA”). The Applicants allege that by returning ineligible refugee claimants to the United States (US), Canada exposes them to risks in the form of detention, refoulement, and other violations of their rights contrary to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 28 July 1951, 189 UNTS at 137 (Refugee Convention or RT) and contrary to the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhumane or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT, collectively referred to as the Conventions).

22 July 2020 | Judicial Body: Canada: Federal Court | Topic(s): Safe third country | Countries: Canada - United States of America

6 July 2020 | Judicial Body: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | Topic(s): Asylum policy - Entry / Exit - Non-refoulement - Right to seek asylum | Countries: United States of America

The panel affirmed the district court’s grant of a temporary restraining order and a subsequent grant of a preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of a rule and presidential proclamation that, together, strip asylum eligibility from every migrant who crosses into the United States along the southern border of Mexico between designated ports of entry.

28 February 2020 | Judicial Body: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | Topic(s): Entry / Exit - Illegal entry - Non-refoulement - Rejection at border - Right to seek asylum | Countries: United States of America

"Expedientes Acumulados 3829-2019, 3849-2019 y 3881-2019". Appeal of this earlier decision by the constitutional court. The Court found that the signing of the "safe third country" agreement between the United States and Guatemala did not violate Guatemalan law, as the President and the Foreign Relations Minister stated they would comply with the internal legal procedure and formal steps for the agreement to become a treaty and enter into force, including approval by congress.

9 September 2019 | Judicial Body: Guatemala: Corte de Constitutionalidad | Topic(s): Safe third country | Countries: Guatemala - United States of America

This case presents us with a simple question: do non-citizens subject to expedited removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1228 have a statutory right to counsel in reasonable fear proceedings before immigration judges? The answer, based on the plain language of § 1228, is yes.

20 August 2019 | Judicial Body: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | Topic(s): Legal representation / Legal aid - Rule of law / Due process / Procedural fairness - Well-founded fear of persecution | Countries: Mexico - United States of America

19 August 2019 | Judicial Body: Canada: Federal Court of Appeal | Topic(s): Appeal / Right to appeal - Family reunification - Refoulement - Safe third country | Countries: Bangladesh - Canada - Colombia - Jordan - Syrian Arab Republic - United States of America