In re Bett

20 Cited authorities

Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting
563 U.S. 582 (2011) Cited 333 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that Congress’s express reservation of state authority to impose certain civil sanctions means what it says
Castro v. Attorney Gen. of the United States
671 F.3d 356 (3d Cir. 2012) Cited 96 times
Finding that minimizing the risk of detection is not necessarily a benefit under the law for the statute’s purposes
Kechkar v. Gonzales
500 F.3d 1080 (10th Cir. 2007) Cited 59 times
Holding insufficient-evidence claim with respect to a voluntary departure determination "does not present a colorable constitutional claim capable of avoiding the jurisdictional bar"
Lozano v. City of Hazleton
724 F.3d 297 (3d Cir. 2013) Cited 42 times 1 Legal Analyses
Finding that IRCA applied to employees and not independent contractors but concluding that the ordinance in question was preempted because it did not distinguish between the two
Keller v. City of Fremont
719 F.3d 931 (8th Cir. 2013) Cited 40 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a local ordinance prohibiting rental housing for illegal aliens was not field preempted and did not conflict with the federal removal process, and where the ordinance specified it did not prohibit conduct “expressly permitted by federal law,” did not conflict with federal anti-harboring law
Ateka v. Ashcroft
384 F.3d 954 (8th Cir. 2004) Cited 35 times
In Ateka v. Ashcroft, 384 F.3d 954 (8th Cir. 2004), for example, we upheld an IJ's determination that the alien was not credible when he claimed that he thought his checking of the "citizen or national" box might be a truthful representation that he was a non-citizen national.
Rodriguez v. Mukasey
519 F.3d 773 (8th Cir. 2008) Cited 20 times
Holding that "the explicit reference to § 1324a in § 1182(C) indicates that private employment is a ‘purpose or benefit’ of the Act"
Crocock v. Holder
670 F.3d 400 (2d Cir. 2012) Cited 12 times
Holding that, where alien presents no evidence other than his own testimony disputing claim that he did not intend to deceive immigration authorities, there is no error in concluding alien failed to meet burden of showing admissibility
Hashmi v. Mukasey
533 F.3d 700 (8th Cir. 2008) Cited 15 times
Upholding inadmissibility determination because the petitioner had unambiguously represented in another employer form he was a United States citizen and because he "admitted at the hearing that he knew a person born in the United States is a United States citizen"
Kirong v. Mukasey
529 F.3d 800 (8th Cir. 2008) Cited 15 times
Finding substantial evidence supported the determination of inadmissability because the petitioner "testified that he did not know what a national was and also that a citizen was a person born in the United States [h]e knew that he was not born in the United States and was not a United States citizen"
Section 1182 - Inadmissible aliens
8 U.S.C. § 1182 Cited 9,759 times 66 Legal Analyses
Holding deportable aliens who have been convicted of "crimes involving moral turpitude"
Section 1227 - Deportable aliens
8 U.S.C. § 1227 Cited 7,920 times 40 Legal Analyses
Granting this discretion to the Attorney General
Section 1229a - Removal proceedings
8 U.S.C. § 1229a Cited 6,316 times 8 Legal Analyses
Granting a noncitizen the right to file one motion to reopen and providing that “the motion to reopen shall be filed within 90 days of the date of entry of a final administrative order of removal”
Section 1255 - Adjustment of status of nonimmigrant to that of person admitted for permanent residence
8 U.S.C. § 1255 Cited 2,846 times 5 Legal Analyses
Listing classes of nonimmigrants, such as students and tourists
Section 1229c - Voluntary departure
8 U.S.C. § 1229c Cited 1,007 times
Imposing statutory penalties for failure to depart
Section 1324a - Unlawful employment of aliens
8 U.S.C. § 1324a Cited 581 times 45 Legal Analyses
Authorizing the Attorney General to pursue injunctive relief and criminal sanctions in federal district court
Section 1240.8 - Burdens of proof in removal proceedings
8 C.F.R. § 1240.8 Cited 306 times 4 Legal Analyses
Applying "clearly and beyond doubt" burden to "proceedings commenced upon a respondent's arrival" or "[a]liens present in the United States without being admitted"
Section 274a.2 - Verification of identity and employment authorization
8 C.F.R. § 274a.2 Cited 85 times 31 Legal Analyses
Establishing Form I–9

In re Bett

20 Cited authorities

Holding that Congress’s express reservation of state authority to impose certain civil sanctions means what it says

Finding that minimizing the risk of detection is not necessarily a benefit under the law for the statute’s purposes

Holding insufficient-evidence claim with respect to a voluntary departure determination "does not present a colorable constitutional claim capable of avoiding the jurisdictional bar"

Finding that IRCA applied to employees and not independent contractors but concluding that the ordinance in question was preempted because it did not distinguish between the two

In Ateka v. Ashcroft, 384 F.3d 954 (8th Cir. 2004), for example, we upheld an IJ's determination that the alien was not credible when he claimed that he thought his checking of the "citizen or national" box might be a truthful representation that he was a non-citizen national.

Holding that "the explicit reference to § 1324a in § 1182(C) indicates that private employment is a ‘purpose or benefit’ of the Act"

Holding that, where alien presents no evidence other than his own testimony disputing claim that he did not intend to deceive immigration authorities, there is no error in concluding alien failed to meet burden of showing admissibility

Upholding inadmissibility determination because the petitioner had unambiguously represented in another employer form he was a United States citizen and because he "admitted at the hearing that he knew a person born in the United States is a United States citizen"

Holding deportable aliens who have been convicted of "crimes involving moral turpitude"

Granting this discretion to the Attorney General

Granting a noncitizen the right to file one motion to reopen and providing that “the motion to reopen shall be filed within 90 days of the date of entry of a final administrative order of removal”

Listing classes of nonimmigrants, such as students and tourists

Imposing statutory penalties for failure to depart

Authorizing the Attorney General to pursue injunctive relief and criminal sanctions in federal district court

Applying "clearly and beyond doubt" burden to "proceedings commenced upon a respondent's arrival" or "[a]liens present in the United States without being admitted"

Establishing Form I–9