Barton v. Barr
| Barton v. Barr | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued November 4, 2019 Decided April 23, 2020 | |
| Full case name | Andre Martello Barton, Petitioner v. William P. Barr, Attorney General |
| Docket no. | 18-725 |
| Citations | 590 U.S. ___ (more) |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Case history | |
| Prior | United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit |
| Holding | |
| The court held that for purposes of cancellation-of-removal eligibility, a §1182(a)(2) offense committed during the initial seven years of residence does not need to be one of the offenses of removal. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Kavanaugh, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch |
| Dissent | Sotomayor, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan |
| Laws applied | |
| 8 U.S. Code § 1182 | |
Barton v. Barr, 590 U.S. __ (2020) is a Supreme Court of the United States ruling which upheld a decision by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals that green card holders could be rendered "inadmissible" to the United States for an offense after the initial seven years of residence under the Reed Amendment.
Background
Andre Martello Barton was born in Jamaica as a native of that country. He was admitted to the United States on May 27, 1989, on a B-2 visa. His status was adjusted to that of a lawful permanent resident (LPR) in 1992 after receiving his green card. He was arrested in January of 1996 on a firearm-related offense.[1]
Barton was found guilty of criminal damage to property, aggravated assault, possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony (O.C.G.A. § 16-11-106) and violations of Georgia's Controlled Substances Act.[2]
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) determined that Barton could be removed from the United States for these offenses. Barton applied for cancellation of removal with the United States Attorney General under .[3][4] DHS argued that Barton's continues residency ended on January 23, 1996, which disqualified Barton from relief against removal. Barton disagreed.
Ruling
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing the majority opinion, ruled that DHS could deport Barton stating "the immigration laws enacted by Congress do not allow cancellation of removal when a lawful permanent resident has amassed a criminal record of this kind."[5]
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor argued that as Barton had already been admitted, the Government must prove he is deportable rather than just inadmissable.[6]
References
- ^ Barton v. Attorney General,
This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain. 904 F.3d 1294, 1296 (11th Cir. 2018)
- ^ "Barton v. Barr". Ballotpedia. Retrieved 2020-12-14.
- ^ "Barton v. Barr". Oyez. Retrieved 2020-12-14.
- ^ Lambe, Jerry (2020-04-23). "Supreme Court Conservatives Rule Against Legal Immigrant Who Sought to Reverse a Deportation Order". Law & Crime. Retrieved 2020-12-14.
- ^ Kavanaugh, Justice Brett. "Barton v. Barr, 590 U.S. ___ (2020)". Justia Law. Retrieved 2020-12-14.
- ^ Sotomayor, Justice Sonia. "Barton v. Barr, 590 U.S. ___ (2020)". Justia Law. Retrieved 2020-12-14.
