Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

statuteappealhabeas corpuscitizenshipdeportationnaturalization
statuteappealhabeas corpuscitizenshipdeportationnaturalization

Related Cases

Jones v. Department of Homeland Security
View Case »
Ibrahim v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
View Case »
Kellman v. District Director
View Case »
Ventura-Escamilla v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
View Case »
Rodriguez v. Gonzales
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Marquez-Almanzar v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

Facts

In April 1976, Marquez-Almanzar, a native of the Dominican Republic, was admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident. He enlisted in the U.S. Army in November 1984 and applied for U.S. citizenship while serving, but his application was not processed. After his military service, he was convicted in state court of attempting to sell cocaine, leading to deportation proceedings initiated by the INS in May 1999. An immigration judge found him subject to removal, and the BIA upheld that decision.

In April 1976, Marquez-Almanzar, a native of the Dominican Republic, was admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident. He enlisted in the U.S. Army in November 1984 and applied for U.S. citizenship while serving, but his application was not processed. After his military service, he was convicted in state court of attempting to sell cocaine, leading to deportation proceedings initiated by the INS in May 1999. An immigration judge found him subject to removal, and the BIA upheld that decision.

Issue

Whether Marquez-Almanzar could be considered a U.S. national under 8 U.S.C.S. 1101(a)(22)(B) and thus avoid removal despite his criminal convictions.

Whether Marquez-Almanzar could be considered a U.S. national under 8 U.S.C.S. 1101(a)(22)(B) and thus avoid removal despite his criminal convictions.

Rule

The court applied the provisions of the REAL ID Act of 2005, which eliminated habeas corpus review of orders of removal and required nationality claims to be presented to the Court of Appeals in the first instance.

The court applied the provisions of the REAL ID Act of 2005, which eliminated habeas corpus review of orders of removal and required nationality claims to be presented to the Court of Appeals in the first instance.

Analysis

The court found that Marquez-Almanzar's claim of U.S. nationality was not valid under the statute, as it does not provide a means for an individual to become a U.S. national. The court referenced previous cases indicating that one must be a citizen to be considered a national and that the term 'permanent allegiance' describes a relationship that is established by birth or naturalization, not by mere claims of allegiance.

The court found that Marquez-Almanzar's claim of U.S. nationality was not valid under the statute, as it does not provide a means for an individual to become a U.S. national. The court referenced previous cases indicating that one must be a citizen to be considered a national and that the term 'permanent allegiance' describes a relationship that is established by birth or naturalization, not by mere claims of allegiance.

Conclusion

The court of appeals denied Marquez-Almanzar's petition, affirming that he was subject to removal as he did not qualify as a U.S. national.

The court of appeals denied Marquez-Almanzar's petition, affirming that he was subject to removal as he did not qualify as a U.S. national.

Who won?

The U.S. Immigration and Nationality Service (INS) prevailed in the case as the court upheld the removal order against Marquez-Almanzar.

The U.S. Immigration and Nationality Service (INS) prevailed in the case as the court upheld the removal order against Marquez-Almanzar.

You must be