Sanchez v. Barr is a decision by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals is a federal court. Its jurisdiction is the states of PA, NJ, DE and the Virgin Islands. A decision in this court is very important, as it is the first level of appeal in the federal system. Only the Supreme Court is higher. In states which are outside of the Third Circuit, advocates could argue why their Circuit should decide similarly.This case is an appeal of the Board of Immigration Appeals decision. Mr. Sanchez was trying to get his case administratively closed. The issue concerned the immigration Judge and Board of Immigration Appeals’ authority to administratively close cases. The answer depended upon statutory interpretation. The Board of Immigration Appeals decided that they do not have authority to administratively close cases. The Attorney General echoed this opinion in the Matter of Castro-Tum. However, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals reversed in January, 2021. They found that Immigration Judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals do have the authority to administratively close cases. This was a great result for Mr. Sanchez. He was in deportation proceedings. He sought legal recourse through asylum, withholding of removal, and withholding of removal pursuant to the Convention Against Torture. He was denied relief on all of these.

Image by Kelly Sikkema, via Unsplash.com.

He also pursued recourse under Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). In this type of situation, the Department of Homeland Security formally decides not to deport otherwise deportable non-citizens. One requirement is that the person cannot have specific types of criminal convictions. Mr. Sanchez had been charged with a crime. This was prior to his being denied asylum, withholding of removal and convention against torture remedies. Two weeks after his denials, the criminal charges against him had been dropped. For this reason, he attempted to get his case administratively closed, so that he could renew his application for DACA.This decision can be greatly beneficial. Administratively closing cases in the immigration court while USCIS adjudicates an application, while someone defends criminal charges, due to medical concerns or for many other reasons is beneficial to all parties present in the immigration courts. For judges, it keeps cases that are highly unlikely to be resolved off the dockets until they are ready to be resolved. For the non-citizens, it allows them the time necessary to navigate the very slow processes of the judicial and immigration systems. For the government, it allows them to focus on cases involving persons with serious criminal history, persons without relief from removal and keeps their already-overwhelming caseloads to a smaller number.If you or someone you know needs help with any immigration-related situation, especially removal proceedings, contact the Law Office of Eric M. Mark in Newark and Jersey City for assistance. We stay on top of legal developments every day to make sure the people we represent have every opportunity for the best possible outcome.