Supreme Court Decision Impacts Those Seeking Asylum Because of Religious Persecution

The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday handed down an immigration law opinion that has important implications in cases in which an individual about to be deported or removed seeks to reopen proceedings to claim asylum because of religious persecution in his country of origin. A federal regulation makes discretionary a decision to reopen proceedings to consider changed conditions relating (among other things) to religious persecution in his country of origin. In Kucana v. Holder, (Sup. Ct., Jan. 20, 2010), the Court, in an opinion by Justice Ginsburg, held that a statutory bar to judicial review of decisions by the Attorney General that are made discretionary by statute does not apply to decisions by the Attorney General made discretionary only by federal regulations. In this case, an Albanian citizen sought political asylum, fearing political persecution. His motion to reopen his removal proceedings was based on claims that conditions in Albania had worsened. Justice Alito filed a concurring opinion. ScotusBlog reports on the decision.