Barton v. Barr

Barton v. Barr, 590 U.S. 222 (2020) is a Supreme Court of the United States ruling which upheld a decision by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals that permanent residents (green card holders) rendered "inadmissible" for some crimes committed under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2) within the initial seven years of continuous residence were ineligible for 8 U.S.C. § 1229b cancellation of removal relief.

Barton v. Barr
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 4, 2019 Decided April 23, 2020
Full case name	Andre Martello Barton, Petitioner v. William P. Barr, Attorney General
Docket no.	18-725
Citations	590 U.S. 222 (more)
Argument	Oral argument
Case history
Prior	United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Holding
The court held that for purposes of cancellation-of-removal eligibility, a §1182(a)(2) offense committed during the initial seven years of residence makes a noncitizen ineligible for relief under the §1229b(d)(1)(B) stop time rule
Court membership
Chief Justice John Roberts Associate Justices Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg Stephen Breyer · Samuel Alito Sonia Sotomayor · Elena Kagan Neil Gorsuch · Brett Kavanaugh
Case opinions
Majority	Kavanaugh, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch
Dissent	Sotomayor, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan
Laws applied
8 U.S. Code § 1182

Background

Andre Martello Barton was born in Jamaica, and admitted to the United States in May of 1989. In 1992, he became a lawful permanent resident of the U.S. However, he was found guilty of criminal damage to property, aggravated assault, possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony (O.C.G.A. § 16-11-106) and violations of Georgia's Controlled Substances Act.^[1]

Lawful permanent residents in the United States are subject to removal proceedings if they commit certain crimes.^[2] The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) determined that Barton could be deported for these offenses. Barton applied for "cancellation of removal" under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a).^[3]

Barton had a strong case for a "cancellation of removal" because of his family ties in the US, long residency from a young age, and continuous residency for seven years as required by §1229b(a). The immigration judge decided Barton was categorically ineligible for relief under the cancellation of removal statute because he had committed §1182(a)(2) offenses within that seven year period triggering the stop time rule under §1229b(d)(1)(B). Under the stop time rule, continuous residence (for the purpose of cancellation of removal) ends when the noncitizen commits an offense "referred to in section 1182(a)(2) of this title that renders the alien inadmissible to the United States". This makes a noncitizen categorically ineligible for relief under §1229b.^[2]

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Opinion of the Court

The United States Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals decision.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing the majority opinion, ruled that DHS could deport Barton stating "the immigration laws enacted by Congress do not allow cancellation of removal when a lawful permanent resident has amassed a criminal record of this kind."^[4]

In a dissenting opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor argued that as Barton had already been admitted, the Government must prove he is deportable rather than just inadmissible.^[5]