Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.
LexisNexis® CLE On-Demand features premium content from partners like American Law Institute Continuing Legal Education and Pozner & Dodd. Choose from a broad listing of topics suited for law firms, corporate legal departments, and government entities. Individual courses and subscriptions available.
Chavez Gonzalez v. Garland
"We hold today that the IJs and BIA possess the inherent authority to terminate removal proceedings, abrogating Matter of S-O-G- & F-D-B-. We likewise conclude the BIA improperly denied Petitioner’s request for administrative closure because it failed to address Petitioner’s specific argument based on his DACA status. ... [W]e fail to see how the general power to terminate proceedings is “[in]consistent” with the authorities bestowed by the INA. 8 C.F.R. §§ 1003.10(b), 1003.1(d)(1)(ii). We have found no provisions stating that the IJ or BIA cannot terminate removal proceedings, and the Government does not cite to any. The Attorney General’s decision in Matter of S-O-G- is therefore in conflict with the plain meaning of section 1003.10(b) and 1003.1(d)(1)(ii) and must be abrogated. ... Having decided the IJs and BIA possess the inherent authority to terminate immigration proceedings, we hereby abrogate the Attorney General’s decision in Matter of S-O-G- & F-D-B-, 27 I. & N. Dec. 462 (A.G. 2018). ... [U]pon remand, the BIA must address Petitioner’s DACA-based administrative closure argument."
[Hats way off to Ben Winograd!]