 |
|
Over the years, various regulations have been interpreted as sources for administrative closure authority. However, Attorney GeneralSessions does not agree with this interpretation of the
regulations. According to Sessions, this temporary closure “encumbers the fair and efficient administration of immigration cases” and such delays benefit the non-citizen, leaving DHS with the burden of seeking re-calendaring. Sessions notes that “the Board has made administrative
closure easier to obtain” through Matter of Avetisyan, 25 I&N Dec.688(BIA 2012), which
he expressly overruled with this decision. That
decision allowed immigration judges to grant administrative closure over a party’s objection.
Sessions cited to the DHS brief representing
that Castro-Tumis one of nearly 200 decisions between April 2017 and December 2017 in which an immigration judge granted administrative closure or refused to re-calendar over DHS’s objection.
According to TRAC’s Immigration Project, 204,686 cases were pending at
immigration courts nationwide in 2017 and
35,897 cases
received administrative
closure. Given these numbers, 200 cases is a small fraction
of cases that faced
DHS opposition on administrative closure.
|
|
|
|
