Big Year for Immigration Lawyers before U. S. Supreme Court - SC will hear several Immigration Cases before Arizona's SB 1070 - SB 1070 has not yet being granted Certiorari by the Supreme Court - What is a Certiorari and Why SB 1070 delayed ??

.

A certiorari is a writ from a higher court to a lower one requesting a transcript of the proceedings of a case for review. A common law writ issued by a superior court to one of inferior jurisdiction demanding the record of a particular case. In Law a certiorari is an order of a superior court directing that a record of proceedings in a lower court be sent up for review.

Etymology of "Certiorari" :

"to be certified, to be informed or shown," 1520s, from a word figuring in the opening phrase of such writs from superior to inferior courts. Passive present infinitive of certorare "to certify, inform," from certior, comp. of certus "sure."

The Supreme Court has a cert petition pending in United States v. Arizona, in which the Ninth Circuit struck down as preempted by federal law four critical provisions of Arizona's controversial S.B. 1070.

The SC Justices are proceding slowly and with wisdom. It will be extremely imprudent and "dangerous" for them to accelerate this hot potato of SB 1070.

The SC Justices can burn their hands with this dangerous ticking bomb.

ImmigrationProf Blog
A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network
Two More Immigration Cases Before U.S. Supreme Court, United States v. Arizona to Follow?
September 27, 2011


Two More Immigration Cases Before U.S. Supreme Court, United States v. Arizona to Follow?

Some excerpts :

The U.S. Supreme Court granted cert in two immigration cases today. The cases are:

• Vartelas v. Holder, No. 10-1211. Should 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(13)(C)(v), which divests a legal permanent resident of his right, under Rosenberg v. Fleuti, 374 U.S. 449 (1963), to make "innocent, casual, and brief" trips abroad without fear that he will be denied re-entry, be applied retroactively to a guilty plea taken prior to the effective date of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act? The case involved a lawful permanent resident who had traveled abroad, and then sought re-entry, after having been convicted in 1994 of a crime involving moral turpitude.

• Holder v. Gutierrez, No. 10-542, consolidated with Holder v. Sawyers, No. 10-543. Can a parent's years of lawful permanent resident status be imputed to an alien who resided with that parent as an unemancipated minor, for the purpose of satisfying 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a)(1)'s requirement that the alien seeking cancellation of removal have "been an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence for not less than 5 years," and can a parent's years of residence after lawful admission to the United States be imputed to an alien who resided with that parent as an unemancipated minor, for the purpose of satisfying 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a)(2)'s requirement that the alien seeking cancellation of removal have "resided in the United States continuously for 7 years after having been admitted in any status"?

For background materials on the two cases, see SCOTUSBlog.com.

In October, the Court will hear oral argument in Judulang v. United States, a case raising complex issues concerning eligibility for Immigration & Nationality Act § 212(c) relief for a lawful permanent resident convicted of an "aggravated felony."

....