J. Jesus Torres-Aguilar v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “an abuse of discretion argument” does not “create the jurisdiction that Congress chose to remove”
• explaining that, to invoke our jurisdiction, a petitioner must allege a constitutional v olation that is at least colorable
• explaining that the court is “no longer empowered to conduct an ‘abuse of discretion’ review of the agency’s purely discretionary determinations as to whether ‘extreme hardship’ exists.”
• finding that a claim must have “some possible validity” to trigger jurisdiction
• preventing the petitioner from establishing jurisdiction by cloaking arguments in constitutional garb
• “[PJetitioner must allege at least a colorable constitutional violation.... To be colorable ... the alleged violation need not be substantial, but the claim must have some possible validity.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).