Pham v. Chavez
Issues
Does 8 U.S.C. § 1231 or 8 U.S.C. § 1226 apply to a bond hearing for an individual who returned to the United States after being removed and claims that they faced death threats and torture in their country of origin?
This case asks the Supreme Court to consider if 8 U.S.C. § 1231 or 8 U.S.C. § 1226 applies to the bond hearing of a noncitizen who was previously deported from the United States, subject to a removal order, and returned to the United States with the request of a deferral of the deportation order. Petitioners Pham et al., on behalf of the United States, contend that 8 U.S.C. § 1231, which would prevent the bond hearing from occurring and require the detention of Chavez, applies to this case. Respondent Chavez contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1226, which would allow her to receive a bond hearing, should apply to this case. The outcome of this case has implications for immigration and detention policies for noncitizens that travel to the United States without authorization.
Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties
Whether the detention of an alien who is subject to a reinstated removal order and who is pursuing withholding or deferral of removal is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1231, or instead by 8 U.S.C. § 1226.
Maria Angelica Guzman Chavez and her fellow respondents are a group of noncitizen individuals that were removed from the United States based on an order of removal. Chavez v.
Edited by
Additional Resources
- Angela Mauroni, Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Immigration Detention and Arbitration Cases, Jurist (June 16, 2020).
- Elura Nanos, SCOTUS Just Agreed to Hear Two New Cases — Here’s What You Need to Know, Law and Crime (June 15, 2020).
- Megan Mineiro & Tim Ryan, Challenge to Deportation Procedures Headed to High Court, Courthouse News Service (June 15, 2020).