Immigration Attorney
Immigration Lawyer Immigration Attorney Profile Legendary Stories Criminal Defense
click here to be intstantly connected to an Immigration Attorney click here to send us an email click here to read our blog
Immigration
Provisional Stateside Waiver
Detained & Criminal Immigration
Defense From Deportation
Family Based Immigration
Marriage to a U.S. Citizen and Removal of Conditions
Non Immigrant Visas
Humanitairian & Special Immigration Programs
Employment Based Immigration
Citizenship
Maintaining Your Residency
Important Links You Need to Know
Resources: Immigration Consequences of Criminal Convictions
Who We Are
Criminal Law
Find Us
Find Us
View our Offices

BIA Backs down from Mandatory Detention: Matter of Garcia Arreola

One of the most brutal and punishingly tools in immigration's arsenal is being able to detain foreign nationals and specifically deeming them as Mandatory Detainees.  After years of adverse decisions, there is some relief in light of repeated Circuit Courts rejecting the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) draconian interpretations.

On June 23, 2010, the BIA held in Matter of Garcia Arreola, 25 I&N Dec. 267 (BIA 2010) that " Section 236(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. ยง 1226(c) (2006), requires mandatory detention of a criminal alien only if he or she is released from non-DHS custody after the expiration of the Transition Period Custody Rules ("TPCR") and only where there has been a post-TPCR release that is directly tied to the basis for detention under sections 236(c)(1)(A)-(D) of the Act. Matter of Saysana, 24 I&N Dec. 602 (BIA 2008), overruled; Matter of Adeniji, 22 I&N Dec. 1102 (BIA 1999), modified."

What was notable is that even the Department of Homeland Security "asks that [the BIA] adopt this more narrow reading of the statutory language."

The BIA was clear: 

"Further, we modify our decision in Matter of Adeniji and now hold that section 236(c) of the Act requires mandatory detention of a criminal alien only if he or she is released from non-DHS custody after the expiration of the TPCR and only where there has been a post-TPCR release that is directly tied to the basis for detention under sections 236(c)(1)(A)-(D) of the Act. "

"Accordingly, we now hold that mandatory detention under section 236(c) of the Act is addressed to the situation of an alien who is released from custody for one of the offenses enumerated in the Act. That is, a post-TPCR "release" from non-DHS custody must be directly tied to the basis for detention under sections 236(c)(1)(A)-(D) of the Act in order to implicate the mandatory detention provision of section 236(c)."



Comments

No Comments Posted
8620 Centerville Road, Manassas, VA 20110 7505 New Hampshire Ave. Suite 318 Takoma Park, MD 20912 Join us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Watch Us On YouTube View Our LinkIn Profile Click here to subscribe to our Rss Feed

The information on this Virginia Lawyer / Law Firm website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this or associated pages, documents, comments, answers, emails, or other communications should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information on this website is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing of this information does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. The Law Offices of Ricky Malik, P.C. represents clients in all 50 states of the United States and the World over, including Manassas, VA, Prince William County, Arlington, Fairfax, Centreville, Alexandria, Falls Church, Roslyn, Washington, DC, Loudon County, Lorton, Woodbridge, Virginia, Takoma Park, MD, Langley Park, Bethesda, Rockville, Hyattsville, Montgomery County, Prince George's County, Columbia, and Baltimore, Maryland.