Opinion ID: 1372411
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The Adjustment-of-Status Regime Supports Our Reading of the Statute

Text: The Secretary also argues that the present-tense language used in sections 204(b), 204(e) and 205 suggests that the citizen spouse must be alive at the time the Secretary adjudicates the citizen-spouse's petition for adjustment of status. Section 204(b) provides, in relevant part, that if [a]fter an investigation of the facts in each case, ... [the Attorney General] determines that the facts stated in the petition are true and that the alien in behalf of whom the petition is made is an immediate relative ..., [she may] approve the petition. 8 U.S.C. § 1154(b). Additionally, under section 204(e), approval of an alien-spouse's visa petition shall not be construed to entitle an immigrant ... to be admitted ... as an immediate relative ... if upon his arrival at a port-of-entry ... he is found not to be entitled to such classification. 8 U.S.C. § 1154(e). And section 205 permits the Secretary to revoke approval of a visa petition at any time for good and sufficient cause. We, however, are not convinced. First, we observe that those provisions relate to visa petitions, not Form I-130 petitions. Therefore, it is not entirely clear that even if facts must be true at the time visa petitions are adjudicated, the same is true of Form-130 petitions. Second, we must assume that when drafting the INA, Congress did not intend an absurd or manifestly unjust result. Green v. Bock Laundry Mach. Co., 490 U.S. 504, 509-10, 109 S.Ct. 1981, 104 L.Ed.2d 557 (1989). The Secretary's interpretation creates an arbitrary, irrational and inequitable outcome in which approvable petitions will be treated differently depending solely upon when the government grants the approval. Robinson, 554 F.3d at 371 (Nygarrd, J., dissenting). The Secretary had the power to grant Mrs. Lockhart's application prior to Mr. Lockhart's death. Freeman, 444 F.3d at 1042. According to 8 U.S.C. § 1186(a), (b)(1), [an] alien spouse who receives permanent resident status as an immediate relative before the second anniversary of her qualifying marriage does so on a conditional basis, and if the Attorney General determines that prior to the second anniversary of the alien's obtaining status the alien's marriage has been judicially annulled or terminated, other than through the death of a spouse,  the Attorney General shall terminate the permanent resident status of the alien. Freeman, 444 F.3d at 1042 (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1186(a), (b)(1)). Had it done so, [Mrs. Lockhart's lawful permanent resident] status could not then have been voided by her husband's death, as the statute expressly states. Id. As such, either the timing of the Secretary's adjudication of the petition or the timing of the citizen-spouse's death would control the outcome of immediate relative petitions. For example, a prompt adjudication of the petition for adjustment of status results in approval, even if the couple had not been married for two years before the adjustment of status. However, a delay in adjudication results in denial if the citizen spouse happens to die before the couple's two-year anniversary. But a severe delay of two years followed by the citizen's death results in approval because the alien-spouse could self-petition. This is exactly the type of absurdity to be avoided in the construction of statutes. See Griffin v. Oceanic Contractors, Inc., 458 U.S. 564, 575, 102 S.Ct. 3245, 73 L.Ed.2d 973 (1982) ([I]nterpretations of a statute which would produce absurd results are to be avoided if alternative interpretations consistent with the legislative purpose are available.). We cannot ignore the plain meaning of the statute which results in a consistent and rational statutory scheme in favor of a reading that is arbitrary and unjust.