Humberto Fernandez-vargas v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General (548 U.S. 30)

U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 22, 2006 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)

Citation
548 U.S. 30 · 126 S. Ct. 2422
Decided
June 22, 2006
Term
October Term 2005
Vote
8–1
Majority author
Justice Souter
Issue area
Civil Rights
Disposition
Affirmed
Outcome
Petitioning party lost
Ideological direction
Conservative

Opinion excerpt

Justice Souter delivered the opinion of the Court. For some time, the law has provided that an order for removing an alien present unlawfully may be reinstated if he leaves and unlawfully enters again. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA), Pub. L. 104-208, div. C, 110 Stat. 3009-546, enlarged the class of illegal reentrants whose orders may be reinstated and limited the possible relief from a removal order available to them. See Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), § 241(a)(5), 66 Stat. 204, as added by IIRIRA § 305(a)(3), 110 Stat. 3009-599, 8 U. S. C. § 1231(a)(5). The questions here are whether the new version of the reinstatement provision is correctly read to apply to individuals who reentered the United States before IIRIRA’s effective date, and whether such a reading may'be rejected as impermissibly retroactive. We hold the statute applies to those who entered before IIRIRA and does not retroactively affect any right of, or impose any burden on, the continuing violator of the INA now before us. I In 1950, Congress provided that deportation orders issued against some aliens who later reentered the United States illegally could be reinstated. Internal Security Act of 1950, § 23(d), 64 Stat. 1012, 8 U. S. C. § 156(d) (1946 ed., Supp. V). Only specific illegal reentrants were subject to the provision, those deported as…

Excerpt of a 31,860-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.

← Back to the decisions database