Supreme Court Decision Sparks Confusion, Creates New Hurdles for Federal Court Review of Removal Orders

The Supreme Court’s newest immigration-related decision creates a conundrum: certain noncitizens must now appeal their deportation orders before their removal proceedings are even finished. The decision, Riley v. Bondi, is sure to make it more difficult for those noncitizens—all of whom are seeking protection from persecution or torture—to get federal court review of their cases. But it also opens up new technical arguments to get that review.

In Riley,the Court considered two questions about the deadline to seek federal court review of a removal order:

• Is the 30-day deadline to file a petition for review of a removal order with a U.S. court of appeals “jurisdictional?” In other words, if a noncitizen misses the deadline to challenge their deportation order, does that strip the federal appeals court of the ability to review the case?

• When a noncitizen is ordered removed by a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officer by reinstating a prior removal order or entering an administrative removal order, but the noncitizen then seeks withholding of removal or protection from deportation under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) in immigration court, does the 30-day petition for review clock start with the DHS removal order or when the immigration court proceedings are finished?  

Answer to Question 1: The Petition for Review Deadline Is Not Jurisdictional, It Is a Claims-Processing Rule

The Court’s unanimous answer to the first question was NO—the 30-day petition for review deadline is not jurisdictional. This means that if a noncitizen misses the deadline, the court of appeals is not entirely barred from considering the case.

Instead, the Court found that the deadline is a “claim-processing” rule. Generally, a claim-processing rule is flexible and can be tolled if the petitioner shows that they were being diligent and missed the deadline due to extraordinary circumstances. However, a mandatory claim-processing rule cannot be tolled—it can only be waived or abandoned by the government.

The Supreme Court did not say whether the 30-day petition for review deadline is a mandatory rule. It is now an open question for the courts of appeals to decide.

Answer to Question 2: The 30-Day Deadline Starts Running When DHS Issues a Reinstatement or Administrative Removal Order

The Court’s majority held that DHS-issued reinstatement and administrative removal orders are final orders of removal that trigger the 30-day deadline, even though the person is still seeking protection from removal in immigration court.

This is a dramatic change in the law. The Court’s ruling overturned decisions from every court of appeals except the Second and Fourth Circuits. Even the Department of Justice had agreed with Mr. Riley that the deadline should not begin until there is a final decision on the person’s applications for withholding and CAT protection.

The Impact

Reinstatement of removal (for noncitizens with prior removal orders) and administrative removal proceedings (for noncitizens with certain criminal convictions who are not lawful permanent residents) have fewer protections than traditional removal proceedings. But these fast-track proceedings include key safeguards: (1) the right to apply for fear-based relief (withholding of removal and protection under CAT) and (2) the right to federal court review.

The Riley decision sets up significant obstacles for noncitizens with reinstatement or administrative removal orders to get review of decisions denying them protection. As Justice Sotomayor (joined by Justices Kagan, Jackson, and Gorsuch) explains in her partial dissent: “One should not be required to appeal an order before it exists.”

Now noncitizens must file petitions for review before they even know whether they will be denied withholding or CAT, let alone the basis for any denial. And they must ask the court of appeals to wait to adjudicate those petitions until the immigration court makes a final decision on their applications.

This is a problem for many reasons, including—

• Unrepresented noncitizens will not know that they have to file a petition for review before their cases are even completed. DHS has yet to set up a system to notify them of this new requirement and the Supreme Court did not order them to do so.
  
• There is no right to appointed counsel in removal proceedings and many, if not most, noncitizens will not have an immigration lawyer representing them.
  
• DHS does not always give people copies of their removal orders, so they may not know when the 30-day clock begins.
  
• Courts of appeals may not be willing to wait for a final decision on the immigration case.

The stakes are high. The noncitizens impacted by this new deadline fear persecution, torture, and even death if they are wrongly removed. And now, they face new and confusing hurdles to seek federal court review of their removal orders.

The post Supreme Court Decision Sparks Confusion, Creates New Hurdles for Federal Court Review of Removal Orders appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/G3ng9AU
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

How to find a job in Canada as a newcomer: The Ultimate Guide.

Canada is a land of opportunity, attracting people from all over the world with its vibrant culture, diverse landscapes, and strong economy. If you’re considering working in Canada, it’s essential to understand the various work permits and regulations available based on your profile and status. Whether you’re an international student, a visitor, or looking to work in Canada, this guide will help you navigate while searching for your first job.

The post How to find a job in Canada as a newcomer: The Ultimate Guide. appeared first on Canadim.

from Canadim https://ift.tt/oA0QzDw
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

Senate Approves Unprecedented Spending for Mass Deportation, Ignoring What’s Broken in our Immigration System

Washington DC, July 1, 2025 — On July 1, the U.S. Senate passed a budget reconciliation bill that includes an unprecedented allocation of funds for immigration detention and enforcement while simultaneously stripping healthcare from millions of Americans.

The bill, passed today with Vice President JD Vance contributing the tie-breaking vote, earmarks some $170 billion for immigration- and border enforcement-related funding provisions. The bill includes:

• $45 billion for building new immigration detention centers, including family detention facilities. This represents a 265 percent annual budget increase to ICE’s current detention budget. It is a 62 percent larger budget than the entire federal prison system and could result in daily detention of at least 116,000 non-citizens.
• $29.9 billion toward ICE’s enforcement and deportation operations, increasing ICE’s annual budget three-fold. 
• Alongside this increased spending in immigration enforcement, between 12 million to 17 million people are at risk of losing their healthcare. 
• Caps the number of immigration judges to 800 despite record backlogs in the immigration court system. 
• $46.6 billion into border wall construction—more than three times what the Trump administration spent on the wall in its first term, despite the failure of the wall to improve or contribute in any meaningful way to border management strategy
• A new $10 billion fund to reimburse DHS for costs related to “safeguard[ing] the borders of the United States to protect against the illegal entry of persons or contraband.” This funding is nearly 50 percent of CBP’s FY 2024 budget. However, unlike a normal budget, this funding would provide very few guardrails and little guidance to DHS on how the funds must be used. As a result, this would become a slush fund for CBP to largely use however it determined.

For full analysis about what is included in the bill, see the Council’s explainer here. 

Altogether, this marks the largest investment in detention and deportation in U.S. history; a policy choice that does nothing to address the systemic failures of our immigration system while inflicting harm, sowing chaos, and tearing families apart.

“This bill will deprive 12 to 17 million Americans of basic health care while investing unprecedented levels of funding in the president’s increasingly unpopular mass deportation agenda, which undermines public safety and creates chaos in American communities,”  said Nayna Gupta, policy director at the American Immigration Council. “At a time when polls show more Americans rejecting mass detention and deportation, this bill ignores what Americans want and doubles down on punitive policies that do nothing to address the real problems in our immigration system including court backlogs, a lack of legal pathways to citizenship, and a broken U.S. asylum system.”

The bill’s enforcement-heavy provisions come at the expense of urgently needed investments in asylum processing, legal representation, community-based alternatives to detention, and support for local governments and nonprofits serving new arrivals.

“Throwing billions at detention centers and enforcement agents is short-sighted. Instead, we should be investing in a system aimed at welcoming immigrants that contribute billions to our economy,” said Adriel Orozco, senior policy counsel at the American Immigration Council. “We don’t need more jail beds and indiscriminate raids. We need balanced solutions that strengthen due process and keep families together.”

The bill will now return to the House of Representatives, where members are expected to vote on final passage later this week. Experts at the American Immigration Council are available to talk more in-depth about the specifics of what’s included in the bill, including immigration court, border funding, what happens to unaccompanied children, the increase in ICE agents, and more.

For additional analysis about what is included in the bill, see the Council’s full explainer here.  

The post Senate Approves Unprecedented Spending for Mass Deportation, Ignoring What’s Broken in our Immigration System appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/MsGJZmh
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

Becoming a Canadian Citizen on Canada Day

Every year on July 1st, people across the country come together to celebrate Canada Day. From fireworks at Niagara Falls to concerts, cultural events, and local gatherings in cities and towns across all provinces and territories. For some, this day has an even more personal meaning as it’s the day they officially become Canadian citizens.

The post Becoming a Canadian Citizen on Canada Day appeared first on Canadim.

from Canadim https://ift.tt/pFTKPBS
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

International students: Best degree to land a high-paying Canadian job

Studying in Canada can be an option to becoming a Canadian permanent resident. Once you graduate from a Canadian college or university, you have a range of options for staying in Canada. But, if you’re going to stay in Canada permanently, you want to be sure that you can get a good, high paying job.

The post International students: Best degree to land a high-paying Canadian job appeared first on Canadim.

from Canadim https://ift.tt/LvFkMy8
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant