Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/17-459_1o13.pdf
Page Number: 35

8 

PEREIRA v. SESSIONS 

ALITO, J., dissenting 

Department  of  Homeland  Security  sends  out  the  initial
notice  to  appear,  but  the  removal  proceedings  themselves
are  scheduled  by  the  Immigration  Court,  which  is  part  of 
the Department of Justice.  See 8 CFR §1003.18(a) (2018). 
The Department of Homeland Security cannot dictate the
scheduling  of  a  matter  on  the  docket  of  the  Immigration 
Court, and at present, the Department of Homeland Secu-
rity generally cannot even access the Immigration Court’s 
calendar.  In re  Camarillo,  25  I. & N.  Dec.,  at  648;  Tr.  of 
Oral  Arg.  52–53.    The  Department  of  Homeland  Security 
may  thus  be  hard  pressed  to  include  on  initial  notices  to
appear a hearing date that is anything more than a rough
estimate  subject  to  considerable  change.    See  §1229(a)(2); 
see also ante, at 18 (disclaiming any effect on the Govern-
ment’s ability to change initial hearing dates).

Including  an  estimated  and  changeable  date,  however,
may do much more harm than good.  See Gonzalez-Garcia 
v. Holder, 770 F. 3d 431, 434–435 (CA6 2014).  It is likely
to  mislead  many  recipients  and  to  prejudice  those  who
make preparations on the assumption that the initial date
is  firm.  And  it  forces  the  Government  to  go  through  the 
pointless  exercise  of  first  including  a  date  that  it  knows
may  very  well  be  altered  and  then  changing  it  once  the
real  date  becomes  clear.  Such  a  system  serves  nobody’s 
interests. 

Statutory  interpretation  is  meant  to  be  “a  holistic  en-
deavor,”  and  sometimes  language  “that  may  seem  ambig-
uous  in  isolation”  becomes  clear  because  “only  one  of  the 
permissible meanings produces a substantive effect that is
compatible with the rest of the law.”  United Sav. Assn. of 
Tex. v. Timbers of Inwood Forest Associates, Ltd., 484 U. S. 
365, 371 (1988).  The real-world effects produced by Perei-
ra’s  interpretation—arbitrary  dates  and  times  that  are
likely  to  confuse  and  confound  all  who  receive  them—
illustrate  starkly  the  merits  of  the  Government’s  alterna-
tive construction.