These summaries are not intended as legal advice. Please contact a licensed attorney to discuss the specifics of your case.
Viewing entries in
New Case Law
The Second Circuit has determined that non-citizens who entered the United States without inspection years ago are detained under 8 USC 1226, not 8 USC 1225.
The full text of Barbosa da Cunha v. Freden can be found here: https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/OPN/25-3141_complete_opn.pdf
The First Circuit has determined that a Virginia conviction for use of a firearm is a crime of violence because it requires “using a firearm while overcoming the victim by violence or intimidation.”
The full text of United States v. Mao can be found here: https://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/sites/ca1/files/opnfiles/24-2107P-01A.pdf
The First Circuit has rejected a categorical rule that resistance to gangs cannot be a political opinion.
“[I]n certain locations, gangs may take on a quasi-governmental role such that opposition to them is similar to opposing a government. Whether a particular gang constitutes a political entity or only a criminal one is, of course, a question that is highly context-dependent and fact-intensive.”
“When evaluating political opinion claims based on resisting gang recruitment or gang opposition, the factfinder must determine whether the applicant has an actual or imputed political opinion; if so, it must then conduct a fact-intensive assessment of the claim to determine if there is a nexus between the opinion and the gang's conduct. Successful applicants will submit persuasive evidence showing, inter alia, (1) that they possess a political opinion, or that the gang attributed a political opinion to them, and (2) a connection between the gang conduct at issue and the actual or imputed political opinion.”
The full text of Lopez Martinez v. Blanche can be found here: https://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/sites/ca1/files/opnfiles/25-1225P-01A.pdf
The California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, has issued a decision granting a motion to vacate a jury verdict under Penal Code section 1473.7. In this case, the defendant was initially represented by a public defender, who determined that there was no reasonable alternative plea to offer the prosecution that would insulate him from immigration consequences. He later hired a private attorney to represent him at trial. After the public defender ruled out any alternate plea, but before the jury convicted him, a change in appellate case law rendered an alternate plea less damaging from an immigration perspective. His private attorney, however, did not advise him of that change in case law. Accordingly, he did not proceed to trial in a properly informed manner.
The full text of People v. Avena can be found here: http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0326//E083900
The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that when a non-citizen fails to appear, and DHS has filed some evidence of alienage (including an I-213), the Immigration Judge should proceed in absentia, even if DHS has not appeared to make the motion.
The full text of Matter of Bolivar-Bolivar can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1435616/dl?inline
The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that a non-citizen has no right to make a closing argument unless he can show that the denial of the opportunity to make the argument amounts to a due process violation.
The full text of Matter of A-M-Z-F- can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1436011/dl?inline
The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that the Secretary of State’s letter indicating that a non-citizen’s presence in the United States would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences is presumptive and sufficient evidence that he is removable under 8 USC 1227(a)(4)(C)(i). The letter was also a significant negative discretionary factor warranting the denial of a waiver for a lawful permanent resident married to a U.S. citizen, with whom he shared a U.S. citizen child. Finally, the letter established that the non-citizen was a danger to national security, precluding him from receiving asylum.
The full text of Matter of M-K- can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1436196/dl?inline
The Ninth Circuit has determined that a Notice of Appeal that states that an Immigration Judge’s decision was “wrongfully made” was insufficient to put the Board of Immigration Appeals on notice that the appellant was raising a due process claim.
The full text of Santana-Gonzalez v. Bondi can be found here: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2026/04/08/16-70793.pdf
The Ninth Circuit has recognized that California permits rape through non-physical duress - such as through threatening to release a sex tape - but has determined that the federal definition of rape also includes such non-physical duress.
The full text of United States v. Gonzalez can be found here: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2026/04/15/23-3532.pdf
The Fourth Circuit has determined that a North Carolina prayer for judgment continued - following completion of court-directed community service - is a conviction for immigration purposes.
The full text of Gardner v. Blanche can be found here: https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/241553.P.pdf
The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that “[a] respondent’s or qualifying relative’s testimony about a medical or mental health condition will generally be insufficient to establish exceptional and extremely unusual hardship where expert testimony, reports, or medical evidence exist and could reasonably have been produced.” Thus, the testimony of the applicant’s teenage son about his suicidal ideations was deemed insufficient to demonstrate the required hardship.
The full text of Matter of Pelagio Mendoza can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1434771/dl?inline
The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that a California conviction for accessory after the fact to a felony is an obstruction of jsutice-related aggravated felony, when accompanied by a sentence of at least one year.
The full text of Matter of Valenzuela Gallardo can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1434026/dl?inline
The Board of Immigration Appeals has determined that only a non-citizen can raise an objection to a non-compliant Notice to Appear; an Immigration Judge may not terminate proceedings absent an objection by the non-citizen. As such, when a non-citizen fails to appear at a hearing, the Immigration Judge may not dismiss the proceedings based on the non-compliant Notice to Appear.
The full text of Matter of Lopez-Orellana an be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1432911/dl?inline
The Board of Immigration Appeals has reaffirmed that Forms I-213 are presumptively reliable and that Immigration Judges must provide specific reasons for finding them unreliable.
The full text of Matter of Mercado-Martinez can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1432826/dl?inline
The Ninth Circuit has determined that lacks jurisdiction to review the agency’s negative reasonable fear determination related to a non-citizen subject to reinstated removal order, unless the non-citizen is challenging the reinstatement order as well.
The full text of Navarette v. Bondi can be found here: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2026/03/23/24-2776.pdf
The Ninth Circuit has determined that Oregon convictions for first third degree assault are crimes of violence. “Oregon courts have explained that attempted first-degree assault under Oregon law requires showing that a defendant took a substantial step toward causing serious physical injury to another.”
The full text of United States v. Chavez-Echeverria can be found here: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2026/03/25/24-4723.pdf
The Ninth Circuit has determined that a Nevada conviction for sale of a controlled substance under Nevada Revised Statute § 453.321(1)(a) is indivisible with respect to the various actus rei criminalized.
The full text of United States v. Casildo can be found here: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2026/03/31/23-35483.pdf
The Ninth Circuit has determined that a non-citizen undergoing the reinstatement of a prior removal order can only show that deprivation of counsel violated his due process rights if he can establish prejudice.
The full text of Verduzco Ruiz v. Bondi can be found here: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2026/04/01/18-71787.pdf
The Ninth Circuit has determined that an ethnic Armenian who entered the United States as a Soviet citizen acted diligently in seeking post-conviction relief within a few months of being notified that Armenia was accepting certain Soviet citizens and therefore, that she was in danger of being removed. “Contrary to the government’s position at oral argument, it is unreasonable to expect a ‘stateless’ individual to take affirmative steps to challenge removability when they do not face an immediate threat of removability.” “Instead, for individuals born during the Soviet era or who are otherwise deemed ‘stateless’ for purposes of removability, we hold that it is reasonable to expect that an individual will begin to take action to challenge removability only once that individual learns that they can be removed to a country and thus are no longer ‘stateless.’”
The full text of Eskilian v. Bondi can be found here: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2026/04/02/20-72157.pdf
The Eight Circuit, joining the Fifth Circuit and splitting from the Seventh Circuit, has determined that all non-citizens who enter the United States without inspection are subject to mandatory detention under 8 USC 1225.
The full text of Avila v. Bondi can be found here: https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/26/03/253248P.pdf
