Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/17-459_1o13.pdf
Page Number: 24.0

20 

PEREIRA v. SESSIONS 

Opinion of the Court 

purpose and legislative history, however, neither supports
the Government’s atextual position that Congress intended
the  stop-time  rule  to  apply  when  a  noncitizen  has  been 
deprived  notice  of  the  time  and  place  of  his  removal  pro-
ceedings.  By  the  Government’s  own  account,  Congress 
enacted  the  stop-time  rule  to  prevent  noncitizens  from 
exploiting  administrative  delays  to  “buy  time”  during 
which  they  accumulate  periods  of  continuous  presence. 
Id., at 37–38 (citing  H. R. Rep.  No. 104–469, pt. 1, p. 122
(1996)).  Requiring  the  Government  to  furnish  time-and-
place  information  in  a  notice  to  appear,  however,  is  en- 
tirely consistent with that objective because, once a proper
notice to appear is served, the stop-time rule is triggered,
and  a  noncitizen  would  be  unable  to  manipulate  or  delay 
removal proceedings to “buy time.”  At the end of the day,
given  the  clarity  of  the  plain  language,  we  “apply  the 
statute as it is written.”  Burrage, 571 U. S., at 218. 

IV 
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the Court of
Appeals  for  the  First  Circuit  is  reversed,  and  the  case  is 
remanded  for  further  proceedings  consistent  with  this 
opinion. 

It is so ordered.