Duran Gonzales v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
659 F.3d 930
9th Cir.2011Background
- Plaintiffs, noncitizen aliens previously removed and who reentered without inspection, sought adjustment of status under 8 U.S.C. §1255, relying on Perez-Gonzalez.
- IIRIRA provisions create barriers: automatic reinstatement under §1231(a)(5) and a ten-year bar with a potential §1182(a)(9)(C)(ii) waiver if consent to reapply is given and the applicant is outside the U.S.
- Duran Gonzales II held that the BIA's Torres-Garcia interpretation was reasonable and that plaintiffs are ineligible for I-212 waivers, vacating the district court and remanding.
- On remand, the district court dismissed and refused to allow amendments; plaintiffs challenged retroactive vs. prospective application of Duran Gonzales II.
- Morales-Izquierdo and Nunez-Reyes en banc addressed retroactivity and held Duran Gonzales II applies retroactively, with concerns about inequitable results if applied retroactively.
- The panel affirms the district court, concluding Duran Gonzales II applies retroactively to the plaintiffs, making them ineligible for I-212 waivers.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Duran Gonzales II retroactively applies to plaintiffs | Gonzales should be prospective for plaintiffs | Gonzales applies retroactively per Morales-Izquierdo | Retroactive application affirmed; Gonzales applies to plaintiffs |
| Whether retroactive application forecloses relief for plaintiffs | Retroactivity defeats only some claims; potential I-212 waiver relief reconsidered | Retroactivity bars I-212 relief for plaintiffs | Retroactivity defeats plaintiffs' relief; dismissal proper |
| Whether Morales-Izquierdo and Nunez-Reyes mandate retroactivity conclusion | These decisions permit prospective treatment to avoid inequity | Morales-Izquierdo and Nunez-Reyes support retroactivity | Morales-Izquierdo and Nunez-Reyes support retroactive application |
Key Cases Cited
- Perez-Gonzalez v. Ashcroft, 379 F.3d 783 (9th Cir. 2004) (holding that INS erred in denying I-212 waiver from within the U.S.)
- In re Torres-Garcia, 23 I. & N. Dec. 866 (BIA 2006) (BIA held no waiver under §1182(a)(9)(C)(ii); more reasonable interpretation supports denial)
- Duran Gonzales v. Department of Homeland Security, 508 F.3d 1227 (9th Cir. 2007) (held BIA Torres-Garcia interpretation reasonable; plaintiffs ineligible for I-212 waivers)
- Brand X Internet Services, 545 U.S. 967 (Supreme Court 2005) (deference to agency interpretations of statute when ambiguity exists)
- Morales-Izquierdo v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1076 (9th Cir. 2010) (retrospective retroactivity of Gonzales; Chevron deference framework)
- Nunez-Reyes v. Holder, 646 F.3d 684 (en banc 9th Cir. 2011) (en banc held retroactivity; Chevron Oil factors; prospective vs retroactive in immigration context)
- Harper v. Virginia Department of Taxation, 509 U.S. 86 (U.S. 1993) (default retroactive rule unless rule reserved for prospective application)
- Fernandez-Vargas v. Gonzales, 548 U.S. 30 (U.S. 2006) (conduct after entry triggers immigration consequences; emphasis on continuing behavior)
- Padilla v. Kentucky, 130 S. Ct. 1473 (U.S. 2010) (inequitable reliance on waivers amid their consequences)
- Beams v. Georgia, 501 U.S. 529 (U.S. 1991) (concept of retroactivity and rule announcement)