July began with a bombshell ruling out of the Supreme Court that puts the power to interpret ambiguous laws more firmly into the hands of courts, rather than the federal agencies administering those laws. The ruling is expected to have broad implications for things like environmental regulation. But how will it impact immigration law?
The justices voted 6-3 to reverse a 1984 court ruling that produced what’s called the Chevron doctrine. Under it, courts are to rely on and uphold the interpretation of federal agencies if the issue at the center of the case has not been specifically addressed by Congress.
Tucson immigration attorney Mo Goldman says the ruling is a mixed-bag for immigration cases.
"There’s a lot of predictions coming out about how it could be more beneficial to our clients and people who are trying to navigate the immigration system, but on the other hand, there's some potential pitfalls," he said. "It leaves a lot of lawyers in different subcategories of immigration law debating about whether it's a good or bad decision, setting aside the other aspects of the decision and how it will impact other agencies."
Goldman says that’s because the final decision for many immigration cases — from work authorization to deportations — ultimately lies with federal agencies, like the Board of Immigration Appeals or Citizenship and Immigration Services. He says the new ruling could provide people more opportunities to win cases on appeal.
On the other hand, he says the ruling could make some immigration policies like DACA, which was created by an administrations and use statute, more vulnerable to legal challenges.
