Supreme Court Rules Against Family in Child Age Out Case | Immigration Jo Office – Jeongyun Jo | Page 71

Supreme Court Rules Against Family in Child Age Out Case

The Supreme Court issued a 5-4 decision in the case of Scialabba v. Cuellar de Osorio siding with the Obama Administration that a child who turns 21 in the middle of waiting for a parent’s green card petition will have to have a green card petition re-filed by their parents after the parents eventually get green cards. They will not retain their earlier priority dates in these cases. The only category where children will “automatically convert” and retain their priority date is in the Family 2nd category where children will convert from the child to the adult category and will retain their priority date.

The decision is a major disappointment because Congress likely didn’t intend such a narrow interpretation of the law. The government argued that because when a child aged out, there was no “appropriate category” for them to switch to (like the Family 2nd category), then immigration law did not provide a remedy because the statute only applied in cases where “automatic” conversion is possible.

Justice Sotomayor made an eloquent dissent noting that Congress clearly wanted to provide a remedy to aging out for a broad group of individuals when it passed the Child Status Protect Act and that the BIA (and now the Supreme Court) have defied that expressed intention.

At issue is Section 1153(h)(3) of the Title 8 of the US Code:

(3) Retention of priority date

If the age of an alien is determined under paragraph (1) to be 21 years of age or older for the purposes of subsections (a)(2)(A) and (d) of this section, the alien’s petition shall automatically be converted to the appropriate category and the alien shall retain the original priority date issued upon receipt of the original petition.

Sotomayor believes that if the person meets the first part (turning 21), then the statute holds there are two things that should happen – the child automatically converts AND the original priority date is to be retained. The majority held that the two parts must be read together – that there must be a category to which to automatically convert and then the original priority date is retained. Sotomayor argues (persuasively in my view), that Congress intended the priority date to be retained even if a new petition needs to be filed where automatic conversion is not available.

Unfortunately, the matter is now closed and Congress will need to revisit this question to clarify that a priority date is to be retained regardless of whether the applicant automatically converts. And on a side note, what was the Obama Administration thinking taking such an anti-immigrant, anti-family position in this case?

<http://blog.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2014/06/09/supreme-court-rules-against-family-in-child-age-out-case/>
This entry was posted in Recent News. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.


No.TitleWriterDateHit
223 우선일자 유지에 관한 미대법원 판결 admin 2014.06.17 3317
222 Immigrant Fee Payment: Tips on Finding Your A-Number and DOS C... admin 2014.06.12 4052
221 Visa Bulletin For July 2014 admin 2014.06.11 770
220 뉴욕주 불체자 면허 연내 발급 무산 admin 2014.06.10 2269
219 가정 폭력 피해자들을 위한 영주권 – VAWA admin 2014.06.10 1777
218 Supreme Court Rules Against Family in Child Age Out Case admin 2014.06.10 591
217 ‘영주권 수속중 21세 넘으면 우선일자 무효’ admin 2014.06.10 918
216 새로 바뀐 시민권 신청 양식 N400에 대해 admin 2014.06.09 2291
215 조건부 영주권 해제를 단독으로 하려면 admin 2014.06.08 1501
214 밀입국 후 결혼을 통한 영주권 획득 admin 2014.06.07 3329
< Prev ... 1 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 93 ... Next >