Prieto-Romero v. Clark

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a noncitizen may be detained pursuant to Section 1226 upon a finding of dangerousness or flight risk
• holding that “the Attorney General’s statutory authority to detain Prieto–Romero . . . whose removal is stayed pending the court of appeals’ resolution of his petition for review, must be grounded in § 1226(a)”
• holding that the Government’s statutory authority to detain an alien “whose administrative review is complete but whose removal is stayed pending the court of appeals’ resolution of his petition for review, must be grounded in § 1226(a)”
• indicating that the two documents are distinct, and the Attorney General “may issue a warrant of arrest concurrently with the notice to appear”
• holding that an alien's 12 detention was not unconstitutionally indefinite when it was prolonged by a challenge to his removal 13 order and distinguishing a case in which the government made an “unusual move” that delayed 14 resolution
• holding that “the Attorney General’s statutory authority to detain Prieto- Romero, whose administrative review is complete but whose removal is stayed pending the court of appeals’ resolution of his petition for review, must be grounded in § 1226(a)”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).