Beresford A. Landers, Jr. v. Board of Immigration Appeals

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit dismissed a petition for review challenging an order disbaring an attorney from practice before the Executive Office for Immigration Review. The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to review such disciplinary orders, as the Immigration and Nationality Act limits appellate review to final orders of removal.

Background

Attorney Beresford Landers, Jr. filed a petition for review of an order by the Executive Office for Immigration Review disbaring him from practice. The government moved to dismiss the appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction, arguing that the court only has authority to review final orders of removal. Landers moved to amend his petition to remove citations to specific statutes and moved to transfer the case to the Ninth Circuit.

The court’s reasoning

The court granted Landers’s motion to amend his petition but ultimately dismissed the appeal. It held that the Immigration and Nationality Act does not confer jurisdiction over disciplinary orders, as it only grants review of final removal orders. The court further found that it could not invoke jurisdiction under the general federal question statute or the Administrative Procedure Act, as there is no statutory authority for appellate review of EOIR disciplinary decisions. The court noted that such challenges should be brought in district court, not a court of appeals.

Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction.

Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994)

What it means going forward

Attorneys challenging disbarment orders by the Executive Office for Immigration Review must seek review in a federal district court rather than a court of appeals.