October Term 2011 · Docket 10-1542
Does a child inherit a parent's permanent resident status for immigration relief?
The dispute centers on whether a child can use a parent's permanent resident status to qualify for cancellation of removal.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Rothfeld argued the government's reading of the statute is not sensible.
Mr. Kinnaird stated that children present special problems under immigration laws.
Ms. Kruger explained that Congress added a five-year durational requirement to the statute.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 23-9 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 23-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 29-43 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 29-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-29 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 19-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 19-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 3-29 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 3-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 27-33 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 27-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 37-41 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 37-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 9-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 9-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 41-45 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 41-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 51-5 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 51-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 21-29 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 21-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 51-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 27-33 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 27-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 33-35 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 33-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 39-49 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 39-49
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case asks if a child inherits a parent's permanent resident status. This status triggers eligibility for cancellation of removal. The government argues the child must hold the status independently. The child's side argues the parent's status applies to the child.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-29 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 19-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 19-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 3-29 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 3-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 9-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 9-7
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 18, 2012.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 9-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 9-7
What each side wants
The child's side wants the court to apply the parent's status to the child.
The government side wants the court to require the child to hold status independently.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-29 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 19-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 19-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 3-29 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 3-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 9-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 9-7
What each side says
The child's side argues the statute allows imputing the parent's status to the child.
The government side argues the statute requires the child to possess the status directly.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-29 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 19-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 19-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 3-29 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 3-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 9-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 9-7
What the justices asked
Justice Kennedy asked if a parent can request status for a five-year-old child.
Justice Breyer asked why the agency does not remove a six-month-old child immediately upon arrival.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 23-9 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 23-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 29-43 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 29-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 27-33 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 27-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 37-41 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 37-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 41-45 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 41-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 51-5 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 51-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 21-29 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 21-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 51-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 27-33 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 27-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 33-35 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 33-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 39-49 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 39-49
Why it matters
This case defines how children access immigration relief. It determines whether a child relies on a parent's legal status. It shapes the agency's power to remove young children from the country.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-29 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 19-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 19-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 3-29 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 3-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 9-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 9-7
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 23-9 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 23-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 29-43 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 29-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 27-33 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 27-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 37-41 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 37-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 9-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 9-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 41-45 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 41-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 51-5 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 51-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 21-29 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 21-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 51-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 27-33 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 27-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 33-35 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 33-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 39-49 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 39-49
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-29 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 19-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 19-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 3-29 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 3-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 9-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 9-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-29 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 19-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 19-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 3-29 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 3-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 9-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 9-7
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.