Nielsen v. Preap
U.S. Supreme Court · decided March 19, 2019 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Decided
- March 19, 2019
- Term
- October Term 2018
- Vote
- 5–4
- Majority author
- Justice Alito
- Issue area
- Civil Rights
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Because Preap and Khoury created a split with four other Courts of Appeals, we granted certiorari to review the Ninth Circuit's ruling that criminal aliens who are not arrested immediately upon release are thereby exempt from mandatory detention under § 1226(c). 583 U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 1279, 200 L.Ed.2d 468 (2018). We now reverse. II Before addressing the merits of the Court of Appeals' interpretation, we resolve four questions regarding our jurisdiction to hear these cases. The first potential hurdle concerns § 1226(e), which states: "The [Secretary's] discretionary judgment regarding the application of [ § 1226 ] shall not be subject to review. No court may set aside any action or decision by the [Secretary] under this section regarding the detention or release of any alien or the grant, revocation, or denial of bond or parole." (Emphasis added.) As we have held, this limitation applies only to "discretionary" decisions about the "application" of § 1226 to particular cases. It does not block lawsuits over "the extent of the Government's detention authority under the 'statutory framework' as a whole." Jenningsv . Rodriguez , 583 U.S. ----, ---- - ----, 138 S.Ct. 830, 841, 200 L.Ed.2d 122 (2018) (quoting Demore , 538 U.S. at 517, 123 S.Ct. 1708 ). And the general extent of the Government's authority under § 1226(c) is precisely the issue here. Respondents' argument is not…
Excerpt of a 39,100-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.