Opinion ID: 201397
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Parolees and Adjustment of Status

Text: 34 Before the promulgation of 8 C.F.R. § 245.1(c)(8), paroled aliens in exclusion proceedings had an independent avenue to apply for adjustment of status. 11 In re Castro-Padron, 21 I. & N. Dec. 379, 379-80, 1996 WL 379828 (BIA 1996). The BIA held that in exclusion proceedings, jurisdiction over an alien's application for adjustment of status lay with the district director of the immigration agency, not the IJ. Id. at 379. The Board explained, [A]pplicants [in exclusion proceedings] can file their adjustment application with the district director of the [INS], who has sole jurisdiction over the application and can act on the application independently of these [exclusion] proceedings. Id. at 380. 35 Historically, the district director had jurisdiction over the adjustment application of both aliens in deportation proceedings who were admitted and aliens in exclusion proceedings who were paroled. 12 In re Manneh, 16 I. & N. Dec. 272, 274, 1977 WL 39268 (BIA 1977). In 1961, regulations gave the IJ the authority in deportation cases to renew admitted aliens' adjustment applications that were denied by the district director and to adjudicate initial applications for such aliens in deportation proceedings. Id. With this change, the district director no longer had authority over adjustment applications once deportation proceedings began. Id. However, the Board determined that this enlarged jurisdiction did not apply when the alien was in exclusion proceedings: the district director retained sole authority for adjustment of status applications. Id. 36 In 1997, the Attorney General 13 promulgated new regulations, which were said to implement IIRIRA. The regulations created a new definition for the term arriving alien: 37 The term arriving alien means an applicant for admission coming or attempting to come into the United States at a port of entry, or an alien seeking transit through the United States at a port-of-entry, or an alien interdicted in international or United States waters and brought into the United States by any means, whether or not to a designated port-of-entry, and regardless of the means of transport. An arriving alien remains such even if paroled pursuant to section 212(d)(5) of the Act.... 38 8 C.F.R. § 1.1(q). 39 Armed with this new definition of arriving alien, the Attorney General made a substantive change to the adjustment of status regulations. The Attorney General made several categories of aliens ineligible to apply for adjustment of status under 8 U.S.C. § 1255(a), including  [a]ny arriving alien who is in removal proceedings pursuant to section 235(b)(1) or section 240 of the Act. 8 C.F.R. § 245.1(c)(8) (emphasis added). It is this particular provision of the regulation that is challenged before this court. 40 The Attorney General also enacted regulations regarding the proper place for an eligible individual to file for adjustment of status. A key regulation states: 41 An alien [who believes he or she is eligible for adjustment of status] shall apply to the director having jurisdiction over his or her place of residence.... After an alien, other than an arriving alien, is in deportation or removal proceedings, his or her application for adjustment of status... shall be made and considered only in those proceedings.... An arriving alien, other than an alien in removal proceedings, who believes he or she meets the eligibility requirements..., shall apply to the director having jurisdiction over his or her place of arrival. 42 8 C.F.R. § 245.2(a)(1) (emphasis added). A parolee in removal proceedings thus no longer has the ability to apply before anyone, either the district director or the IJ, for adjustment of status. By contrast, a parolee who is not in removal proceedings (as an arriving alien) can, consistent with earlier practice, apply to the district director for adjustment of status. We are informed that most arriving alien parolees are placed in removal proceedings. The new regulatory scheme is, thus, a break from earlier practice. 43 In promulgating 8 C.F.R. § 245.1(c)(8) in 1997, the Attorney General explained the rationale for the new regulation: 44 Consistent with Congress' intent that arriving aliens ... be removed in an expedited manner through the procedures provided..., the Attorney General has determined that she will not favorably exercise her discretion to adjust the status of arriving aliens who are ordered removed.... 45 62 Fed.Reg. 444, 452 (January 3, 1997). In an effort to quickly remove aliens, the regulation aimed to eliminate avenues available to arriving aliens in removal proceedings that allow such aliens to delay their removal through an application for adjustment of status. Id. The Attorney General explained that an arriving alien will not be able to adjust status within the United States. If an arriving alien is eligible for an immigrant visa, she will be required to return to ... her country of residence and request it through the consular process available to all aliens outside of the United States. Id. The Attorney General believed that if the Service decides as a matter of prosecutorial discretion, not to initiate removal proceedings but to parole the arriving alien, the alien will be able to apply for adjustment of status before the district director. Id. 46 Under the new regulations, arriving aliens in removal proceedings (regardless of whether they otherwise meet the statutory criteria for adjustment of status) must leave the United States and go through consular processing in order to adjust status; the respondent has represented that this is the only option available to them. But there are significant limitations even as to this avenue. Non-citizens are subject to 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(9)(B)(i), which bars non-citizens from reentry into the United States for three years if they were unlawfully present in the United States for more than 180 days but less than one year and for ten years if they were unlawfully present for more than one year. 14 Any waiver of this statutory bar is in the absolute discretion of the Attorney General. 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(9)(B)(v). Also, non-citizens who have not been admitted into the United States are ineligible for voluntary departure. 8 U.S.C. § 1229c(a)(4). Following any involuntary removal, they will be ineligible for readmission for five years unless the Attorney General grants a waiver. 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(9)(A)(i), (iii). Parolees have, by definition, not been admitted, and thus will generally be subject to this five year bar for involuntary removal as well. Denying paroled aliens in removal proceedings the ability to adjust status within the United States thus creates a significant hardship on these individuals and their families. 47 Of course, as the Attorney General has stated, the immigration agency in theory can decide to terminate the removal proceedings in the alien's favor, which would allow the arriving alien — who would then not be in removal proceedings — to apply for adjustment of status before the district director. The government as prosecutor in the removal proceedings may, in its discretion, terminate the proceedings in order to permit the alien to apply for adjustment of status. But as this case demonstrates, the BIA has apparently taken the position that neither it nor the IJ may suspend or terminate the proceedings for this purpose without the government's consent.