Opinion ID: 387173
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: finding of deportability

Text: 11 Petitioners also contend that their deportation would constitute an unfair labor practice by Vogue. In an argument based loosely on NLRB v. Apollo Tire Co., Inc., 604 F.2d 1180 (9th Cir. 1980), 3 they assert that, even if they had entered without inspection, public policy precluded a finding of their deportability and required that the deportation proceedings be terminated. The Board rejected this assertion, ruling that the immigration judge had no power to terminate the proceedings. When an immigration statute makes an alien deportable, as 8 U.S.C. § 1251(a)(2) (1976) does here, and INS enforcement officials seek deportation, the immigration judge is without power to terminate the proceedings on equitable, humanitarian, or other grounds not specified by the statute. See Lopez-Telles v. INS, 564 F.2d 1302, 1304 (9th Cir. 1977) (immigration judge has no discretionary authority to terminate deportation proceedings); Guan Chow Tok v. INS, 538 F.2d 36, 38 (2d Cir. 1976) (immigration judge cannot exercise discretion and withhold deportation in contravention of the statute). 12 Affirmed.