Supreme Court· 6/15/2015

Reyes Mata v. Lynch

Citations

576 U.S. 143
135 S. Ct. 2150
192 L. Ed. 2d 225
2015 U.S. LEXIS 3919
25 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 348
83 U.S.L.W. 4434

How courts have described this case

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

recognizing that Courts of Appeals have held they generally lack authority to review the BIA’s discretionary sua sponte reopening decision
holding that courts have jurisdiction over a BIA’s preliminary ruling that a motion to reopen is untimely or “falls short in some other respect”
holding that courts have jurisdiction over a BIA’s preliminary ruling that a motion to reopen is untimely or “falls short in some other respect”
recognizing that Courts of Appeals have held they generally lack authority to review the BIAʹs discretionary sua sponte reopening decision
holding that courts have jurisdiction to review the BIA's refusal to exercise its sua sponte power to reopen cases
recognizing that “when a federal court has jurisdiction, it also has a virtually unflagging obligation to exercise that authority”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Kagandelivered, Thomas

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

101 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

20 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.