Garland v. Singh
Consolidated with Campos-Chaves v. Garland (22-674)
Holding
Because each of the aliens in this case received a proper notice for the removal hearings they missed and at which they were ordered removed from the United States, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229(a), they cannot seek rescission of their in absentia removal orders on the basis of defective notice under Section 1229a(b)(5)(C)(ii).
Judgment
Affirmed, 5-4, in an opinion by Samuel Alito on Jun 14, 2024. Justice Jackson filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Gorsuch joined.
Dec 29, 2022Application (22A583) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from January 10, 2023 to February 9, 2023, submitted to Justice Kagan.
Dec 29, 2022Application (22A584) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from January 10, 2023 to February 9, 2023, submitted to Justice Kagan.
Dec 29, 2022Pursuant to Rule 34.6 and Paragraph 9 of the Guidelines for the Submission of Documents to the Supreme Court's Electronic Filing System, filings in this case should be submitted in paper form only, and should not be submitted through the Court's electronic filing system.
Dec 30, 2022Application (22A583) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until February 9, 2023.
Dec 30, 2022Application (22A584) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until February 9, 2023.
Jan 27, 2023Application (22A583) to extend further the time from February 9, 2023 to March 10, 2023, submitted to Justice Kagan.
Jan 27, 2023Application (22A584) to extend further the time from February 9, 2023 to March 10, 2023, submitted to Justice Kagan.
Jan 27, 2023Application (22A583) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until March 10, 2023.
Jan 27, 2023Application (22A584) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until March 10, 2023.
Mar 10, 2023Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 13, 2023)Mar 14, 2023Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 13, 2023 to May 13, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
Mar 22, 2023Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 15, 2023, for all respondents. See Rule 30.1.
Mar 28, 2023Motion of respondent Raul D. Mendiz-Colin to extend the time to file a response from April 13, 2023 to May 15, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
Mar 29, 2023Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 15, 2023, for all respondents.
Apr 27, 2023Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 15, 2023 to May 22, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
Apr 28, 2023Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including May 22, 2023, for all respondents.
May 22, 2023Brief of respondents Varinder Singh and Raul Daniel Mendez-Colin in opposition filed.Jun 6, 2023DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/22/2023.
Jun 6, 2023Reply of petitioner Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General filed. (Distributed)Jun 29, 2023DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/29/2023.
Jun 30, 2023Petition GRANTED. The petition for a writ of certiorari in No. 22-674 is granted. The cases are consolidated, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. VIDED.
Jun 30, 2023Because the Court has consolidated these cases for briefing and oral argument, future filings and activity in the cases will now be reflected on the docket of No. 22-674. Subsequent filings in these cases must therefore be submitted through the electronic filing system in No. 22-674. Each document submitted in connection with one or more of these cases must include on its cover the case number and caption for each case in which the filing is intended to be submitted. Where a filing is submitted in fewer than all of the cases, the docket entry will reflect the case number(s) in which the filing is submitted; a document filed in all of the consolidated cases will be noted as “VIDED.”
Jun 30, 2023As Rule 34.6 provides, “If the Court schedules briefing and oral argument in a case that was governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c) or Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 49.1(c), the parties shall submit electronic versions of all prior and subsequent filings with this Court in the case, subject to [applicable] redaction rules.” Subsequent party and amicus filings in the case should now be submitted through the Court’s electronic filing system, with any necessary redactions.
Aug 4, 2023The briefing proposal set forth in the Solicitor General’s letter of July 27, 2023, is adopted. The Solicitor General shall file a consolidated opening brief on the merits, limited to 17,000 words, on or before August 29, 2023. Any brief of an amicus curiae in support, or in support of neither party, shall bear a light green cover. Petitioner in No. 22-674 and respondents in No. 22-884 may each file a response brief on the merits on or before October 18, 2023, and the briefs shall bear light red covers. Any brief of an amicus curiae in support shall bear a dark green cover. The Solicitor General shall file a consolidated reply brief limited to 9,000 words. VIDED
Nov 17, 2023Record requested from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Nov 17, 2023SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, January 8, 2024. VIDED.
Nov 30, 2023CIRCULATED
Dec 1, 2023Sealed material from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit electronically available with the Clerk. The remainder of the record is available on PACER.
Jan 8, 2024Argued. For Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General: Charles L. McCloud, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For petitioner in 22-674 and respondents in 22-884: Easha Anand, Stanford, Cal. VIDED.
Jun 14, 2024Judgment REVERSED (No. 22-884 as to respondent Mendez-Colin), and VACATED AND REMANDED (No. 22-884 as to respondent Singh); AFFIRMED (as to No. 22-674). Alito, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, JJ., joined. Jackson, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Sotomayor, Kagan, and Gorsuch, JJ., joined. VIDED.
Jul 16, 2024Judgment Issued.Recommended Citation: Garland v. Singh, SCOTUSblog, https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/garland-v-singh/