Regulations Clash to Prevent Green Card
Aguilar v. Ashcroft, No. 03-72718

Mr. Aguilar lost his appeal before the Board of Immigration Appeals, and was given thirty days to leave the country. Before the thirty days elapsed, he married a U.S. citizen, making him immediately eligible to apply for a green card. But first he had to apply to reopen his case with the Board of Immigration Appeals. The Motion to Reopen was filed within the thirty-day deadline he was given to leave the U.S. Mr. Aguilar asked the Board to make a decision before the 30-day deadline, but the request was ignored. He also asked the USCIS for permission to stay in the U.S. beyond the 30-day deadline to await a decision from the Board; that request was also denied. If he obeyed the 30-day order and left the U.S., he would be subject to a bar forbidding his return, even with a green card, for ten years. Therefore, he remained beyond the thirty days and his Motion to Reopen was denied for that reason. This decision came 86 days after he filed his Motion to Reopen, which had asked for an expeditious decision.

Hill, Piibe & Villegas challenged these conflicting laws in the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and was aided by The American Immigration Law Foundation with an amicus curiae brief. One year later, the Court released a decision on the same issue but in a case that had been filed earlier, agreeing with the stance taken by Hill, Piibe & Villegas, read the similar case  here. Using this new case, Mr. Aguilar has been able to proceed successfully with his green card application.