Unpub. CA6 Claim Preclusion Victory: Jasso Arangure v. Garland

Jasso Arangure v. Garland

"Ramon Jasso Arangure lived in the United States as a lawful permanent resident. After he pled guilty to first-degree home invasion, the Department of Homeland Security initiated removal. But the removal didn’t go as planned: DHS failed to show that Jasso was in fact removable, and the immigration judge terminated the proceeding. So DHS tried again. It started a second removal proceeding based on a new legal theory but the same underlying facts. The problem? The doctrine of claim preclusion prevents parties from litigating matters they failed to raise in an earlier case. Because claim preclusion barred the second removal proceeding, we grant the petition for review, vacate, and remand."

[Hats off to Nadia Anguiano-Wehde, Benjamin Richard Casper Sanchez and Seiko Shastri of the University of Minnesota Law School's James H. Binger Center for New Americans, Russel Reid Abrutyn of Abrutyn Law Office and Paul Abraham Dimick of the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota!]