Supreme Court to Hear Oral Argument in Big Crimmigration Case in New Year
The Supreme Court has announced that it will hear oral argument in Lynch v. Dimaya on January 17, 2017. The issue in the case is whether 18 U.S.C. 16(b), as incorporated into the Immigration and Nationality Act’s provisions governing an immigrant’s removal from the United States, is unconstitutionally vague. The Ninth Circuit, in an opinion by Stephen Reinhardt (joined by judge Kim McLane Wardlaw with a dissent by Judge Consuelo Callahan), held that it was, relying on Johnson v. United States (2015).. The court specifically held that a statutory reference to a “crime of violence” was unconstitutionally vague.
ImmigrationProf blogger Jennifer Koh previously blogged an analysis of the Ninth Circuit ruling. In addition, here is a summary of the ruling. Jennifer Koh has written an article on this issue, forthcoming in the Wisconsin Law Review.
KJ