Federal Court Review of Immigration
Immigration Law · Lesson 11
Federal Court Review of Immigration
這一課問的是：聯邦法院對移民決定有何審查？
ActorActObjectStandardConsequence
Issue · what this lesson is really about
What review of immigration decisions is available in federal court?
這一課問的是：聯邦法院對移民決定有何審查？
Trigger words & phrases that should flag this issue:
petition for reviewhabeascircuit courtjurisdictional bar
Core Terminology · 7 must-know
Tap a card to flip and reveal the meaning.
petition for review
Tap to see meaning
Direct review of BIA decisions in court of appeals.
審查請求。
INA § 242
Tap to see meaning
Judicial review provisions.
INA § 242。
§ 242(a)(2)(B)
Tap to see meaning
Bars review of discretionary decisions.
裁量阻卻。
§ 242(a)(2)(C)
Tap to see meaning
Bars review of certain criminal removal orders.
刑事阻卻。
constitutional/legal questions
Tap to see meaning
Reviewable despite jurisdictional bars (§ 242(a)(2)(D)).
憲法/法律問題例外。
habeas
Tap to see meaning
Limited post-IIRIRA but available for detention.
Habeas。
REAL ID Act
Tap to see meaning
Channels review to PFR; eliminates habeas for removal.
REAL ID Act。
Rule Sentence · the workhorse
Under INA § 242, direct judicial review of final removal orders is by petition for review in the court of appeals within 30 days of the BIA's final order; jurisdictional bars limit review of discretionary decisions and certain criminal removal orders, but constitutional claims and pure legal questions remain reviewable under § 242(a)(2)(D).
Sentence Anatomy · 5 roles, 5 colors
Every rule sentence breaks into five visual roles.
Actor 行為人non-citizen petitioner非公民申請人
Act 行為seeking federal court review求聯邦法院審查
Object 對象BIA decisionBIA 決定
Standard 法律標準INA § 242 + jurisdictional barsINA § 242 + 阻卻
Consequence 後果review granted or barred審查或阻卻
Casebook Snapshot · a real American case
Guerrero-Lasprilla v. Barr
Holding. "Questions of law" reviewable under INA § 242(a)(2)(D) include the application of a legal standard to undisputed or established facts — mixed questions of law and fact — even in cases otherwise barred by criminal-conviction jurisdictional limits.
Why it matters. Guerrero-Lasprilla broadens "legal question" reviewability — preserves court review despite jurisdictional bars.
Guerrero-Lasprilla：法律問題含應用標準於確立事實之混合問題。
Common Mistakes · what trips students
✗ all immigration decisions 可審查。
✓ Multiple jurisdictional bars under § 242.
有多項阻卻。
Mini IRAC · build the Application
Issue. May P obtain federal court review of BIA decision denying her asylum claim where she argues BIA misapplied legal standard for past persecution?
Rule. INA § 242(a)(2)(D) preserves federal court review of constitutional claims and questions of law, including mixed questions where legal standard is applied to facts.
Application (model). P argues BIA misapplied the past persecution legal standard. Because Guerrero-Lasprilla treats applications of legal standards to established facts as reviewable legal questions, the fact that P's challenge is to the BIA's application of legal standard — not the underlying facts — means the question is reviewable under § 242(a)(2)(D).
Pick the right element for each blank:
g1.
g2.
Conclusion. Therefore, federal court review is available for P's legal challenge.
MBE Check · multiple choice
BIA denies P's discretionary cancellation of removal as a matter of discretion. May P challenge in federal court?
Practice Drill · tap to build the rule
Drop the chips here in correct order:
Tap chips to add → tap chips in the target to remove: