Fernando Pinho and Maria Pinho v. Immigration & Naturalization Service (Ins)

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that because “[s]uspension of deportation is prospective relief it does not impair any vested rights” and therefore “no potential violation of due process exists”
• holding that “[t]he plain meaning of these statutes establishes Congress’s intent to apply the stop-time rule to all cases, including those pending as of [the date of the enactment of IIRIRA]”
• holding change in eligibility criteria for suspension of deportation, a discretionary form of relief, did not implicate due process rights
• describing “foreign relations, national security policy, and compliance with on-going government programs” as “legitimate government interests”
• collecting court of appeals cases holding that “the stop-time rule applies to all pending cases in which a final administrative decision had not been rendered by the [time of] enactment of the [IIRIRA]”
• aliens whose deportation has not been suspended have no vested right in suspension of deportation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).