Lopez v. Gonzalez

Good news: Decision ensures that thousands of immigrants will at least be entitled to an immigration hearing rather than facing automatic deportation. See below.

From Families Against Mandatory Minimums Legal News:

Supreme Court inserts discretion in deportation cases

12/5/06

On December 5, the Supreme Court held by an 8-1 vote in Lopez v. Gonzalez that the government cannot automatically deport a noncitizen when the person has been convicted of a state felony drug crime that would otherwise be a misdemeanor under federal law. The decision will not eliminate the possibility of deportation; rather, it will give noncitizens a chance to challenge the government’s decision to seek deportation.

The petitioner, Jose Antonio Lopez, was a permanent legal resident of the United States when he was convicted in South Dakota state court of helping another person possess cocaine. Although South Dakota classifies this offense as a felony, federal law treats the offense as a misdemeanor.

After serving 15 months in state prison, Lopez’s case was picked up by the Immigration and Naturalization Services. The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) authorizes automatic deportation when a noncitizen commits an aggravated felony such as a drug trafficking crime. But the statute does not define a “drug trafficking crime,” referring to a criminal code that defines it as “any felony punishable under the Controlled Substances Act” (CSA). The government reasoned that Lopez’s state felony drug conviction should be enough to trigger deportation under the INA, using an argument that strained the plain meaning of the statute. The Court disagreed, holding that a state drug felony can only trigger deportation under the INA if the conduct is also a felony under the federal CSA.

In addition to automatic deportations, the Lopez decision could affect immigrants seeking asylum or legal reentry to the U.S. because immigration law bars such avenues for immigrants convicted of an aggravated felony. Lopez should also resolve the widespread circuit split “about the proper understanding of conduct treated as a felony by the State that convicted a defendant of committing it, but as a misdemeanor under the CSA.” Nearly every circuit has based sentencing guidelines decisions on this faulty interpretation of state felonies. FAMM will continue to report on this important legal decision as its impact becomes clearer.

Click here to read the Supreme Court's decision in Lopez v. Gonzales.
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-547.pdf

For more in depth analysis of the decision, visit the Supreme Court's blog.
http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/archives/2006/12/court_limits_de.h...

Bookmark/Search this post with:

| | | | |