Background
Herson Octavius, a Haitian national and lawful permanent resident, was convicted in Florida state court of battery of a child in 2008. Following his conviction, he was ordered deported to Haiti in 2013. He applied for cancellation of removal, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture, but the immigration judge denied these requests citing egregious circumstances and a lack of remorse. The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the denial.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed jurisdictional and constitutional claims de novo. It found that challenges to discretionary relief like cancellation of removal cannot deprive an alien of a constitutionally protected liberty interest, thus foreclosing due process claims. The court rejected arguments regarding the Board’s standard of review, noting the Board explicitly applied de novo review to legal issues. It also dismissed arguments concerning congressional delegation to executive officers, the nature of assembly-line adjudication, the Appointments Clause regarding administrative law judges, and the major questions doctrine, citing established precedent.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces the Eleventh Circuit’s precedent that courts lack jurisdiction to review non-colorable challenges to discretionary immigration relief and confirms the appointment authority of administrative law judges within the Department of Justice.