U.S. SUPREME COURT WILL HEAR TWO CASES WITH SIGNIFICANT IMPLICATIONS FOR U.S. IMMIGRATION LAW

On the first Monday of October, 10/06/2014, the U.S. Supreme Court opened its new term. For this new term, the Supreme Court Justices decided to hear two cases with significant implications for U.S. immigration law - Melloudi v. Holder and Kerry v. Din.

Mellouli v. Holder, will answer the question of whether a noncitizen—even a green card holder—can be mandatorily detained and deported for possessing drug paraphernalia, even absent proof that the paraphernalia is related to a controlled substance. 

Moones Mellouli— a lawful permanent resident who earned two master’s degrees and worked as an actuary—was arrested while driving in Kansas. After the arrest, he was caught in jail with four tablets of Adderall, a controlled substance, in his sock. In 2010, he pled down to misdemeanor “possession of drug paraphernalia,” a charge that did not make reference to a controlled substance. In 2012, however, ICE arrested Mellouli and sought to deport him for violating a state law “relating to a controlled substance.”

Kerry v. Din, revisits the doctrine of “consular nonreviewability,” under which U.S. State Department consular officials’ decisions regarding immigration law are virtually unreviewable in courts. Even when immigration officials grant a visa petition, the State Department can still deny the actual visa for almost any reason at all. 

This scenario happened to Amber and Victor Ramirez of Kankakee, Illinois, in 2011. USCIS granted Amber’s petition for a visa for Victor, her spouse. Victor then traveled to the U.S. consulate in Juarez, Mexico to obtain the visa. The US consulate refused, however, saying only there was “reason to believe” Victor might engage in illegal activity in the United States.

Stay tuned.