Supreme Court (SCOTUS) justices heard oral arguments Monday in Barton v. Barr. The case asks the court about legal alien status and whether a green-card holder not seeking admission to the U.S. can be “rendered inadmissible?”
The case
The plaintiff, Martello Barton, is a legal permanent U.S. resident from Jamaica. Barton appealed a lower court ruling that he was ineligible to have his deportation canceled. He challenged his planned deportation for drug and gun convictions. The convictions date back to 1996 and were from Georgia.
Barton is a car repair shop manager. He came to the United States back in 1989 as a teenager with his mother. He was convicted in 1996 of assault and possession of a firearm. That stems from an incident in which his friend shot at a house from a car Barton was driving. Barton also has convictions for drug possession in 2007 and 2008. Mr. Barton is not a choir boy.
There is a law that lets some longtime legal residents avoid removal for certain crimes. Permanent residents facing deportation may apply to have their removal canceled. The opportunity is there if they have been living continuously in the United States for at least seven years. It applies except if they have committed certain serious felonies.
The issue
At issue in the case is the meaning of a 1996 change in the law. The change is known as the “stop-time rule.” It disqualifies people who commit certain crimes from the exemption from deportation. The stop-time rule stops the clock on their period of continuous residency. If Barr wins it would make it easier to expel thousands of immigrants with serious violent criminal convictions.
In 2017, immigration authorities said Barton’s deportation could not be canceled. They cited the 1996 assault charges triggering the stop-time rule. The incident occurred just months before Barton reached the seven-year milestone. The federal government said the rule was triggered because the assault charge. The charge would bar his admission into the country.
Barton’s lawyers argued that admission is different from deportation. They contend there can be no declaration of inadmissible because he already is here. Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the decision in 2018.
Decision and potential impact
The nine justices during an hour of arguments appeared divided. The SCOTUS leftists seemed sympathetic toward Barton. Those more conservative justices appeared inclined to agree with the government’s bid to deport him.
There are more than 13 million lawful U.S. permanent residents, “green card” holders. The estimate is that there are 1.9 million non-citizens the government has deemed deportable. That is proceeding from the assumption of the basis of a criminal conviction. Most are legal residents or those in the country on temporary visas. Should America enforce deportation for violent felonies or is good time mitigation? What benefit does America get from retention of violent criminals? The Barton v. Barr ruling is due by the end of June.
