Access to Justice

RELEASE: Supreme Court Removes Roadblocks for Asylum-Seekers Seeking Access to Courts

WASHINGTON, DC – Following the Supreme Court’s announcement of its decision in Santos-Zacaria v. Garland, in which a unanimous Supreme Court issued a rare victory for a noncitizen seeking judicial review of the government’s decision denying her humanitarian protection in the United States,  Constitutional Accountability Center (CAC) Appellate Counsel Smita Ghosh had this reaction:

Today the Court concluded that the statutory requirement that non-citizens take advantage of all administrative remedies within the immigration court system before filing in federal court is not jurisdictional and therefore can be waived by the government or excused by judges in exceptional circumstances.

Echoing the arguments in an amici curiae brief we filed along with the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, the Court explained that the statutory requirement is not jurisdictional because, among other things, Congress did not use the sort of clear language necessary to impose the harsh consequences of a jurisdictional requirement.

The Court also held that noncitizens do not need to petition an appeals board for reconsideration of every immigration decision before bringing a case to federal court.

In reaching this result, the Court removes some of the many roadblocks facing noncitizens seeking review of the government’s decision to remove them from the country.  This result is especially important because noncitizens in removal proceedings frequently have limited English proficiency, are not guaranteed legal representation, and are often subject to mandatory detention during their proceedings.

Today’s decision is an important victory for noncitizens trying to navigate our complicated immigration system—and for access to the courts.

##

Resources:

Amici curiae brief in Santos-Zacaria v. Garland:

https://www.theusconstitution.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Santos-Zacaria-Brief-Amici-Curiae.pdf

##

Constitutional Accountability Center is a nonpartisan think tank and public interest law firm dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text, history, and values. Visit CAC’s website at www.theusconstitution.org.

###

More from Access to Justice

Access to Justice
March 19, 2025

Fight over False Claims Act whistleblower provision heats up on appeal

Reuters
At first glance, it might seem far-fetched to suggest a whistleblower law that’s been on...
Access to Justice
U.S. Supreme Court

Martin v. United States

In Martin v. United States, the Supreme Court is considering whether the Supremacy Clause overrides the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA)’s express waiver of sovereign immunity when a federal employee’s actions “have some nexus with...
Access to Justice
February 21, 2025

TV (Gray DC): CAC’s Becker-Cohen Joins Gray DC to Discuss Procedural Due Process Claim in Death Row Case

Gray DC
Access to Justice
February 24, 2025

RELEASE: As Justice Jackson Points Out, Seemingly Narrow Death-Penalty Case Would Have “Major Implications” for Standing Jurisprudence if Court Adopted Texas’s Argument

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Gutierrez v....
Access to Justice
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates

In United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit is considering whether the qui tam provision of the False Claims Act violates the Appointments...
Access to Justice
U.S. Supreme Court

Gutierrez v. Saenz

In Gutierrez v. Saenz, the Supreme Court is considering whether a federal court, as part of its analysis of a Section 1983 plaintiff’s standing to pursue a procedural due process claim against state officials, must...