Document: 502 U.S. 129 112 S.Ct. 515 116 L.Ed.2d 496 Rafeh-Rafie ARDESTANI, Petitionerv.IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE. No. 90-1141. Argued Oct. 8, 1991. Decided Dec. 10, Syllabus After petitioner Ardestani prevailed in an administrative deportation proceeding brought by respondent Immigration and Naturalization Service, immigration judge awarded her attorney's fees costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), which permits a prevailing party "adversary adjudication" before agency recover from Government, 5 U.S.C. § 504(a)(1). The EAJA defines adjudication," relevant part, as "an adjudication section 554 of [Title 5]," is part Administrative Procedure (APA). 504(b)(1)(C)(i). Section 554, turn, applies, inter alia, "every case required statute be determined on record after opportunity for hearing." Board Appeals vacated denied Ardestani's award ground that proceedings are not within EAJA's scope, Court affirmed. Held: adversary adjudications "under 554" thus do fall category has waived sovereign immunity authorized costs. Pp. 132-139. (a) Although (INA) hearing, 8 1252(b), they governed APA. Marcello v. Bonds, 349 302, 75 757, 99 L.Ed. 1107. It immaterial regulations have been promulgated conforming hearings more closely procedures APA adjudications, rests large INA's prescription it "shall sole exclusive procedure determining [an alien's] deportability," 1252(b) (emphasis added), leaves open no possibility INA should displaced if governing become functionally equivalent 554's procedures. 133-134. (b) most natural reading applicability 554," adopted seven Courts Appeals, those must "subject to" or "governed by" 554. strong presumption statute's plain language expresses congressional intent, Rubin United States, 449 424, 430, 101 698, 701, 702, 66 633, rebutted any statements legislative history. Thus, meaning unambiguous context does permit that, since both "to hearing," phrase encompasses all "as defined in" 554(a), even otherwise section. This conclusion reinforced limited nature waivers immunity. renders States liable and, thus, amounts partial waiver immunity, strictly construed States' favor, see, e.g., Library Congress Shaw, 478 310, 318, 106 2957, 2963, 92 250. Kubrick, 444 111, 118, 100 352, 357, 62 259; Irwin Department Veterans Affairs, 498 ----, 111 805, 865; Sullivan Hudson, 490 877, 892, 109 2248, 2258, 104 941, distinguished. Also rejected argument functional interpretation needed further goals underlying statute. While making applicable would serve its broad purposes eliminating financial disincentives who defend against unjustified governmental action deterring unreasonable exercise Government authority, province decide whether bring such scope. 134-138. 904 F.2d 1505 (CA11 1990), O'CONNOR, J., delivered opinion Court, REHNQUIST, C.J., WHITE, SCALIA, KENNEDY, SOUTER, JJ., joined. BLACKMUN, filed dissenting opinion, STEVENS, THOMAS, took consideration decision case. David N. Soloway, Atlanta, Ga., petitioner. Lawrence G. Wallace, Washington, D.C., respondent. O'CONNOR Court. 1 Petitioner Service (INS). She sought 504 28 2412, provides parties certain adversarial may Government. We now consider authorizes INS. conclude not. 2 * Iranian woman Bahai faith entered visitor December 1982. remained this country lawfully until end May 1984 then asylum. State informed INS fear persecution upon return Iran was well founded. In February 1986, however, asylum application entering she had reached "safe haven" Luxembourg established residence there. advised only three days en route stayed hotel, never applied residency country. Nonetheless, following month, issued order show cause why deported. 3 At successfully renewed EAJA. amount $1,071.85 based his determination "prevailing party" position pursuing "substantially justified." appealed Appeals. Attorney General scope See CFR 24.103 (1991); 46 Fed.Reg. 48921, 48922 (1981) (interim rule). A divided Eleventh Circuit petition review held apply proceedings. INS, (1990). 4 granted certiorari, 499 1101, 113 212 (1991), resolve conflict among Appeals1 affirm. II pertinent 504(a)(1) "[a]n conducts shall award, other than expenses incurred connection with proceeding, unless adjudicative officer finds substantially justified special circumstances make unjust." title represented counsel otherwise." Title 5, delineates formal requirements (APA), see §§ 556, 557, sets forth some requirements. As agree question presented A. 6 554(a) states provisions six statutory exceptions here. Subsections through (e) establish followed described subsection (a). we previously decided 1107 (1955). 7 Marcello, intended Nationality 1952 (INA), Stat. 163, amended, 1101 et seq., supplant Two years enactment INA, concluded were subject Wong Yang Sung McGrath, 339 33, 70 445, 94 616 (1950). legislatively overruled almost immediately afterward rider Supplemental Appropriation Act, 1951. 64 1044, 1048 determine whether, revising laws repealing rider, reversed previous reinstated holding "expressly supersedes" hearing light "the background legislation, laborious adaptation process, specific points at deviations made, recognition history adaptive technique particular deviations, direction methods therein prescribed proceedings." U.S., S.Ct., 762. Applying our precedent clear 1983 conform 48 8038-8040 (1983). hold simply except sanctioned INA. Rather, deportability alien section." 242(b) (codified 1252(b)) added); supra, 309, 761. Neither analysis nor displace event mandated B 9 principal EAJA, because, like "required contends procedural remainder urged us. 10 "The starting point 'the [of statute] itself.' " James, 597, 604, 3116, 3120, 483 (1986) (quoting Blue Chip Stamps Manor Drug Stores, 421 723, 756, 95 1917, 1935, 44 539 (1975) (Powell, concurring)). word "under" many dictionary definitions draw context. case, Indeed, addition court below, ordinary appears cases cited n. 1, supra. one observed, several times itself, "[i]n locations, creative possible—'under' means 'subject [or pursuant] to' 'by reason authority of.' St. Louis Fuel Supply Co. FERC, 281 U.S.App.D.C. 329, 333, 890 446, 450 (1989).2 11 "strong presumption" intent "rare exceptional circumstances," 633 (1981), when contrary clearly expressed. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 421, 432, 12, 107 1207, 1213, 434 (1987); Consumer Product Safety Comm'n GTE Sylvania, Inc., 447 102, 108, 2051, 2056, 766 (1980). cannot overcome 'that purpose expressed words used.' American Tobacco Patterson, 456 63, 68, 102 1534, 1537, 71 748 (1982) Richards 369 9, 82 585, 591, 492 (1962)). possible, contends, Congress' defining limit trial-type represented, chose refer 554." merely describe type proceeding; also prescribes assume unqualified reference provision mandating protections general indication types cover. 12 unable identify conclusive statement regarding define much less undermine understanding enough House Conference Committee Report states, without comment, "defined under" H.R.Conf.Rep. 96-1434, p. 23 conceivable covered APA, could just easily mean conducted similarly unpersuaded meant institute substantive rather semantic change when, explanation, changed draft S.Rep. 96-253, 24 (1979) 13 Our ambiguities insufficient undercut liable, Any favor States. 250 (1986); Ruckelshaus Sierra Club, 463 680, 685-686, 103 3274, 3277-3278, 77 938 14 Because therefore wholly outside distinguishable recognized once over matter, careful "assume narrow intended." 259 (1979); 453, 457, 435 (1990) ("Once made waiver, think rule equitable tolling suits same way private suits, little, any, broadening waiver."); 941 (1989) (holding Social Security remand district "are integral 'civil action' judicial review," representation available civil 2412). 15 Finally, necessary stated objective eliminate thereby deter authority. Congressional Findings Purposes, 2325, note 504; H.R.Rep. 96-1418, pp. (1980); 5; Commissioner, Jean, 110 2316, 134 16 doubt served mindful complexity procedures, enormity interests stake, legal especially important. acknowledge forced shoulder emotional burdens justified. But extend statute, coupled strict construction constrain us otherwise. 17 twice expanded definition adjudications" include considered coverage. 1985, Fidelity Construction 700 1379 (CA Fed.), cert. denied, 464 826, 97, 78 (1983), amending 504(b)(1)(C) add Contract Disputes 1978. Pub.L. 99-80, 1(c)(2)(B), 184. amended Program Fraud Civil Remedies 1986. 99-509, 6103(c), Stat.1948. well, Congress, III 18 need reach Appeals' alternative fee-shifting precluded 292 1362, individual "at expense Government." judgment 19 so ordered. 20 THOMAS 21 whom STEVENS joins, dissenting. 22 (INS Service) put ordeal attempted land which, already determined, well-founded religious convictions. abandoned matter Instead, argues class awards fees. today accepts contention, relying purportedly "plain" canon strictly. I find "plain," Court's my view, exemplify kind fee awards: alien's stake enormous (sometimes life death context); rules surrounding very complex; specialized but short supply; evidence suggests conduct abusive. troubling me, because forgotten recent admonition "in diminish deterrent effect seeking of, defending against, action." 890, 2257, (internal quotation omitted). notably absent account advanced excluding Proper principles entitles award. Accordingly, dissent. 25 correctly observes eligibility depends qualifies adjudication." key term 504(b)(1)(C): 'adversary adjudication' . [5 U.S.C.] fact counsel, issue can 26 Respondent "adjudication "conducted of" emphasizes (1955), 1952, 27 Service's crucial assumption single, meaning—the urges. might given recommends, least isolation. That say, "unambiguous." plausible interpretation. These appear compound namely, establishes components adjudication": Government's "by otherwise" what makes adversary; adjudication. 29 drafted specify explicitly features constitute "adjudication" purposes. "adjudication," accepted time enacted. Rather reproduce definition, referred reader, shorthand, generic plausibly "adjudication, or, literally, heading 30 ambiguous, consult between two interpretations [the EAJA's] 2257 31 stated. Judiciary notes high cost assistance superior resources expertise Federal challenging action. 9-10 (1980) (House Report). Fee address problem: "When there costs," noted, "a choose acquiescing detriment." Id., 12. Nor, availability vindicate interests. chooses litigate representing own vested interest refining formulating public policy," recognized, ensure "legitimacy fairness law." 10. removing acts unreasonably vindicates rights curbs excesses. 32 description focuses "adversariness" requirement—the presence absence representation—rather technically governs offered state where taken counsel; omit altogether mention 21, (Conference According third definition: 33 conference substitute Procedures [sic ] takes precludes situation agency, Administration, take If, adjudication, adversarial" added). 23. 34 repeats Report's earlier focus decisive factor adversary. More important, use under," only—as surely do—correspond 35 Nowhere Reports floor debates suggestion exclude agency's (let alone INS's) Nor ever discussed seems attention whatsoever opposed to, example, rulemaking, ratemaking, licensing proceedings, universally assumed is, staked out position. short, nothing "hook"—a convenient signal, text, essential uncontroversial characteristics "adjudication." 36 confirmed examined particularity: Administration refrained deciding Richardson Perales, 402 389, 409, 91 1420, 1431, 842 (1971). notwithstanding uncertainty, "adversary," Report, 23, quoted 1985 reenactment similar stronger effect: 37 "As enacted 1980, covers adjudications' i.e., 'in otherwise'. generally excludes 1980 'If adversarial,' [footnote omitted] Act. committee's Secretary Health Human Services implemented experiment five locations law judge. precisely 504(b)(1)(C). While, generally, remain Act" (first emphasis original; others supplied). 99-120, 10-11 (1985). 38 despite demurral social security expressing view issue, nevertheless appropriate. circumstance strongly indicates did intend coverage depend provision, proceeding. 39 noted above, recently Hudson "read 2257. particular, while federal courts otherwise, id., 891, "part parcel" action, "civil action" 888, 2256. 40 holding, argued unambiguously excluded exclusion precluded, principle expressio unius est exclusio alterius, their EAJA.1 conceded contention "not force," went say "ris[e] level oust reasonable manifest purpose." 41 recognizes advance Act's protecting individuals' rights, "help[ing] assure decisions reflect deliberation." classic example persons "may deterred involved" "disparity these individuals government." 6. An facing unfamiliar arcane system law, often unskilled English language, sometimes uneducated; reasons, "deportation difficult aliens fully comprehend, let conduct, frequently require counsel." Escobar Ruiz 838 1020, 1026 (CA9 1988) (en banc). areas, competent obtain. Anker, Determining Asylum Claims Int'l J. Refugee Law 252, 261 Evidence engaged abusive litigation tactics. Watson, No "Independent Operators," Legal Times, 14, 1990, remark Dennis Cook, Counsel, "I told offices appeal every adverse regardless merits, [and] refuse stipulations"); Note, Hearings, 97 Yale L.J. 1459, 1471 (1988) (describing pattern "vigorous opposition adjudicated claims, irrespective merits"). 42 stakes involved proceedings—particularly cases—are enormous. See, 449, 1222, (1987). Under circumstances, fulfill 43 recanting read first statute" compels deny Ardestani. argument, suggested persuasive, persuasive Hudson. additional gives departing construed. For good reason, protect fisc provide breathing space legitimate litigation. fulfilled requirement lacked substantial justification. Senate reduce bill's prevent 'chilling effect' proper enforcement efforts." (1979). therefore, effect, maxim relies. reapplication restrict still superfluous, inconsistent intent.2 IV 45 INS's "plain meaning" arguments, remaining arguments. Both resolved suggests, first, owes deference General's indicated, reviewing owe statutes charge administer. Adams Fruit Barrett, 494 638, ---- - 1384, 1390-1391, 108 585 (1990); Professional Reactor Operator Soc. NRC, 291 219, 223, 939 1047, 1051 (1991) (no assigned role construing statute). applies agencies administered inappropriate. 47 argues, second, proscribed person privilege being (at Government) he choose." 235, 1362. bar shifting necessarily overrides policy. "applies actions existing statutes." 18. There different provisions. contains provisions, application. correct effectively repeal 292. relieve obligation appoint pay indigent aliens. F.2d, 1028. hand, reimburse prevail By virtue purposes, coexist. automatic right Government-appointed Government-paid counsel. And vast majority cases, hope—the claim V 49 sum, ambiguous support position; confirms interpretation; whose heretofore interpreted Page 150 signals 50 permanent jurisprudence. entitled reverse Five below Hashim 936 711 (CA2 1991), pending, 91-207; 935 650 (CA4 1991); Hodge Dept. Justice, 929 153 (CA5 91-83; Full Gospel Portland Church Thornburgh, 288 356, 927 628 91-494; Clarke 172 (CA3 1990); accord Owens Brock, 860 1363 (CA6 (using Employees Compensation benefit determinations EAJA). Ninth 1020 E.g., 504(a)(2) ("A shall, thirty final disposition submit shows eligible receive ."); 504(c)(2) ("If dissatisfied 504(d) ("Fees paid prevails funds appropriation otherwise.") (emphases weaker here canon. observed actual tiny fraction originally estimated. projected $19.4 million fiscal year (FY) 1982, $21.3 FY 1983, $22.4 1984, total $63.1 million. outlays totaled about $158,000—roughly one-quarter percent original estimate. 8-9 describes "problem implementing caused overly interpretations.

Category: 5