In re De Pablo

33 Cited authorities

Bousley v. United States
523 U.S. 614 (1998) Cited 14,241 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding that the rule announced in Bailey v. United States, 516 U.S. 137, 116 S.Ct. 501, 133 L.Ed.2d 472, which narrowed the scope of the term "use" in § 924(c), applied retroactively
Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. Florida
517 U.S. 44 (1996) Cited 5,257 times 23 Legal Analyses
Holding that Congress cannot abrogate state-sovereign immunity under its Article I commerce power, and rejecting the result in Pennsylvania v. Union Gas Co. , 491 U.S. 1, 109 S.Ct. 2273, 105 L.Ed.2d 1, seven years later; the decision in Union Gas never garnered a majority
Engle v. Isaac
456 U.S. 107 (1982) Cited 6,601 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding burden to demonstrate cause and prejudice is far "greater than the showing required to establish plain error on direct appeal"
Henderson v. Shinseki
562 U.S. 428 (2011) Cited 1,679 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that there must be "clear indication that Congress wanted the rule to be jurisdictional," although Congress "need not use magic words" (cleaned up)
Kontrick v. Ryan
540 U.S. 443 (2004) Cited 1,732 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that time limit for objection in bankruptcy proceedings is not jurisdictional but instead a claim-processing rule
Reed v. Ross
468 U.S. 1 (1984) Cited 1,946 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that a petitioner has cause for procedurally defaulting a constitutional claim where that claim was "so novel that its legal basis [wa]s not reasonably available to counsel" at the time of the default
Harper v. Virginia Dept. of Taxation
509 U.S. 86 (1993) Cited 983 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Supreme Court’s "application of a rule of federal law to the parties before the Court requires every court to give retroactive effect to that decision"
Securities Comm'n v. Chenery Corp.
332 U.S. 194 (1947) Cited 4,227 times 15 Legal Analyses
Holding that if the agency rests its decision on "grounds are inadequate or improper, the court is powerless to affirm the administrative action by substituting what it considers to be a more adequate or proper basis"
INS v. Bagamasbad
429 U.S. 24 (1976) Cited 874 times
Holding no requirement "to arrive at purely advisory findings and conclusions as to statutory eligibility" for immigration relief when application fails for other reasons
Pierre-Paul v. Barr
930 F.3d 684 (5th Cir. 2019) Cited 224 times
Holding Pereira limited to the narrow stop-time rule context
Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 Cited 367,253 times 968 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Section 1229b - Cancellation of removal; adjustment of status
8 U.S.C. § 1229b Cited 5,257 times 24 Legal Analyses
Granting the Attorney General discretion to cancel the removal of an alien who has “been battered or subjected to extreme cruelty by a ... parent who is ... a United States citizen”
Section 1229 - Initiation of removal proceedings
8 U.S.C. § 1229 Cited 1,391 times 6 Legal Analyses
Requiring notice of the "acts or conduct alleged to be in violation of law" and the "charges against the" noncitizen
Section 1003.1 - Organization, jurisdiction, and powers of the Board of Immigration Appeals
8 C.F.R. § 1003.1 Cited 98 times
Allowing for affirmance without opinion

In re De Pablo

33 Cited authorities

Holding that the rule announced in Bailey v. United States, 516 U.S. 137, 116 S.Ct. 501, 133 L.Ed.2d 472, which narrowed the scope of the term "use" in § 924(c), applied retroactively

Holding that Congress cannot abrogate state-sovereign immunity under its Article I commerce power, and rejecting the result in Pennsylvania v. Union Gas Co. , 491 U.S. 1, 109 S.Ct. 2273, 105 L.Ed.2d 1, seven years later; the decision in Union Gas never garnered a majority

Holding burden to demonstrate cause and prejudice is far "greater than the showing required to establish plain error on direct appeal"

Holding that there must be "clear indication that Congress wanted the rule to be jurisdictional," although Congress "need not use magic words" (cleaned up)

Holding that time limit for objection in bankruptcy proceedings is not jurisdictional but instead a claim-processing rule

Holding that a petitioner has cause for procedurally defaulting a constitutional claim where that claim was "so novel that its legal basis [wa]s not reasonably available to counsel" at the time of the default

Holding that the Supreme Court’s "application of a rule of federal law to the parties before the Court requires every court to give retroactive effect to that decision"

Holding that if the agency rests its decision on "grounds are inadequate or improper, the court is powerless to affirm the administrative action by substituting what it considers to be a more adequate or proper basis"

Holding no requirement "to arrive at purely advisory findings and conclusions as to statutory eligibility" for immigration relief when application fails for other reasons

Holding Pereira limited to the narrow stop-time rule context

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Granting the Attorney General discretion to cancel the removal of an alien who has “been battered or subjected to extreme cruelty by a ... parent who is ... a United States citizen”

Requiring notice of the "acts or conduct alleged to be in violation of law" and the "charges against the" noncitizen

Allowing for affirmance without opinion