Opinion ID: 2750189
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Administrative Exhaustion and Deprivation of

Text: Judicial Review As the district court recognized and as the Government concedes, the statute governing expedited removal proceedings afforded Raya-Vaca no opportunity for administrative or judicial review. See, e.g., 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1)(C) (“Except as provided [in the subparagraph on credible-fear interviews], a removal order . . . is not subject to administrative appeal . . . .”); id. § 1225(b)(1)(A)(i) (“If an immigration officer determines that an alien . . . who is arriving in the United States . . . is inadmissible . . . , the officer shall order the alien removed from the United States without further hearing or review . . . .” (emphasis added)); see also Barajas-Alvarado, 655 F.3d at 1082 (“[T]he [Immigration & Nationality Act (INA)] precludes meaningful judicial review of the validity of the proceedings that result in an expedited removal order.”). We therefore conclude that Raya-Vaca exhausted all available administrative remedies and was deprived of the opportunity for judicial review.