Thailer v. LaRocca

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that “sexual abuse of a minor” did not have a statutory counterpart of inadmissibility under § 212(a)
• applying the regulation to find no comparable ground of inadmissibility in section 212(a) for a conviction for “sexual abuse of a minor” under section 101(a)(43)(A) of the aggravated felony definition
• relief unavailable because the aggravated felony conviction of sexual abuse of a minor that formed the basis for deportability had no statutory counterpart in the grounds of inadmissibility under Section 212(c)
• relief unavailable because the aggravated felony conviction of sexual abuse of a minor that formed the basis for deportability had no statutory counterpart in the grounds of inadmissibility under Section 212(c)
• “[W]hether a ground of deportation or removal has a statutory counterpart in the provisions for exclusion or inadmissibility turns on whether Congress has employed similar language to describe substantially equivalent categories of offenses.”
• “[W]hether a ground of deportation or removal has a statutory counterpart in the provisions for exclusion or inadmissibility turns on whether Congress has employed similar language to describe substantially equivalent categories of offenses.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).