Galeano-Romero v. Barr

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that jurisdiction existed over the legal question of whether the Board had departed from its precedent
• holding that whether the BIA followed its own precedent presents a question of law
• concluding noncitizen failed to raise a colorable constitutional claim by arguing that the BIA’s failure to consider all the relevant factors, allegedly in light of overwhelming evidence that warranted a favorable exercise of discretion, violated his due-process rights
• rejecting attempt to couch claims that Board “failed to consider all the relevant factors . . . in the aggregate” and “overvalued” and “undervalued” evidence as constitutional claims
• “The same legal standard applies to motions to reopen and motions to remand.” (brackets and internal quotation marks omitted)
• “A petition for review does not raise a question of law by disputing the Board’s appraisal of the degree of hardship likely to [petitioner’s] wife.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).