Viewing entries tagged
safeguards

Comment

Second Circuit Weighs in on Procedural Safeguards for Incompetent Respondent

The Second Circuit has determined that an Immigration Judge must “explain the adequacy of the safeguards implemented with reference to the character, scope, and severity of the noncitizen’s disabilities.” “Without reference to the character, scope, and severity of the incompetency to proceed absent safeguards, a [reviewing] court is stymied in its ability to evaluate the adequacy of the chosen safeguards.”

“Faced with substantial evidence of disabilities supporting the possibility that Reid was incompetent to continue without safeguards, the IJ did implement a number of safeguards. But the BIA erred in accepting her conclusory assertion, without supporting discussion, that the adopted safeguards were adequate. The record provides no support for that conclusion; it may well have been that additional safeguards to protect Reid’s rights and privileges should have been considered. For our purposes, because the IJ gave no consideration to the character, scope, and severity of Reid’s disabilities, she deprived a reviewing court of the ability to assess the adequacy of the chosen safeguards.”

The full text of Reid v. Bondi can be found here:

https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/8db76edb-1f7a-4a01-b7ca-392b391a1aca/1/doc/20-3324_amd_opn.pdf

Comment

Comment

Ninth Circuit Limits Applicability of Mental Illness in Particularly Serious Crime Determination

The Ninth Circuit has determined that the agency must only reference a petitioner’s mental illness during a particularly serious crime analysis if the petitioner presents evidence attributing the crime to mental illness. The court also determined that the agency was not required to terminate proceedings for a mentally ill petitioner who physically attacked his qualified representative and who refused to cooperate in any document collection efforts made by his representative.

The full text of Benedicto v. Garland can be found here:

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2021/09/09/18-73237.pdf

Comment