Boyd v. United States of America

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that the BIA’s order was sufficient to show reasonable considera- tion when it listed the basic facts of the case, cited to pertinent stat- utory and regulatory authority, and accepted the IJ’s reasoning
• stating that equitable tolling generally requires the litigant show: (1) he has been pursuing his rights diligently; and (2) there were extraordinary circumstances preventing him from meeting the deadline
• explaining that the 90-day deadline is subject to equitable tolling
• requiring procedural due process claims that can be remedied by the immigration courts to be exhausted
• stating we review claims of legal error, including claims the BIA did not provide reasoned consideration in its decision, de novo
• explaining that procedural due process claims must be exhausted but clarifying that “those constitutional claims raised for the first time in this Court that address issues beyond the power of the BIA to address in adjudicating an individual’s case may not require exhaustion”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).