By concluding in Matter of Santiago-Santiago that an immigration judge may not terminate removal proceedings based solely on the fact that the respondent has been granted DACA, the Board acts in a manner that is inconsistent with the Fifth Circuit’s decision and the Department of Justice regulation permitting termination based on deferred action.
Statement on Board's decision
Share
More from Alex Padilla
We write with concern that the recent guidance issued to nursing homes by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) may intimidate nursing home staff from helping residents exercise their constitutional right to vote and…
Extending this constitutional protection to private individuals — who hold no official government position, take no oath to support the Constitution, and are exempt from federal ethics and record-keeping laws — fundamentally distorts the…
We are concerned that this hiring decision in Shasta County has less to do with Ms. Peters’ qualifications, and more to do with the President’s obsession with interfering in the midterm elections.
“The growing backlog of projects in limbo due to FTA and OMB inaction is unacceptable.”
Other voices in this conversation
