Loading…
Opinion
318 F.3d 365 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Feb 12, 2003
Full text
Albathani v. INS
First Circuit · Jan 12, 2022
First Circuit · Nov 30, 2020
First Circuit · Aug 27, 2018
First Circuit · May 23, 2018
D.C. Circuit · Oct 24, 2017
Parentheticals
holding that the BIA’s “affirmance without opinion” procedure does not violate due process
holding that, so long as a rational basis was set forth in some stage of agency proceedings, the BIA may affirm IJ decisions without an opinion
stating that an unadmitted alien present in the United States has only “limited” due process rights
Saidou Dia v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States
stating that an unadmitted alien present in the United States has only "limited" due process rights
Saidou Dia v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States
holding that the BIA’s “affirmance without opinion” procedure does not violate due process
noting that Chenery only requires the relevant agency, here the INS, to give reasons for its decisions, which may issue from either the BIA or an IJ
noting that “[t]he summary affirmance scheme does create ... problems [for review], but they do not render the scheme a violation of due process or render judicial review impossible”
stating that an unadmitted alien present in the United States has only “limited” due process rights
suggesting that summary affirmance by the BIA does not “establish that the required review is not taking place”
noting that “[t]he summary affirmance scheme does create ... problems [for review], but they do not render the scheme a violation of due process or render judicial review impossible”
“[I]f the BIA does not independently state a correct ground for affirmance in a case in which the reasoning proffered by the IJ is faulty, the BIA risks reversal on appeal.”
"[I]f the BIA does not independently state a correct ground for affirmance in a case in which the reasoning proffered by the IJ is faulty, the BIA risks reversal on appeal."
