8 C.F.R. § 241.6

Administrative stay of removal

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Any request of an alien under a final order of deportation or removal for a stay of deportation or removal shall be filed on Form I-246, Stay of Removal, with the district director having jurisdiction over the place where the alien is at the time of filing. The Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner, Executive Associate Commissioner for Field Operations, Deputy Executive Associate Commissioner for Detention and Removal, the Director of the Office of Juvenile Affairs, regional directors, or district director, in his or her discretion and in consideration of factors listed in 8 CFR 212.5 and section 241(c) of the Act, may grant a stay of removal or deportation for such time and under such conditions as he or she may deem appropriate. Neither the request nor failure to receive notice of disposition of the request shall delay removal or relieve the alien from strict compliance with any outstanding notice to surrender for deportation or removal.

(b) Denial by the Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner, Executive Associate Commissioner for Field Operations, Deputy Executive Associate Commissioner for Detention and Removal, Director of the Office of Juvenile Affairs, regional director, or district director of a request for a stay is not appealable, but such denial shall not preclude an immigration judge or the Board from granting a stay in connection with a previously filed motion to reopen or a motion to reconsider as provided in 8 CFR part 3.

(c) The Service shall take all reasonable steps to comply with a stay granted by an immigration judge or the Board. However, such a stay shall cease to have effect if granted (or communicated) after the alien has been placed aboard an aircraft or other conveyance for removal and the normal boarding has been completed.

[65 FR 80298, Dec. 21, 2000, as amended at 67 FR 39259, June 7, 2002]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 57 cases (16 in the last 5 years), 2003–2026 · leading case: Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418 (2009).
Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418 (2009). “See 8 CFR §§241.6 (a)-(b), 1241.6(a)-(b). If, however, the alien wants a court to restrain the Executive from executing a final and enforceable removal order, the alien must seek an injunction to do so.”
Johnson v. Guzman Chavez, 594 U.S. 523 (2021). “See §1231(c)(2)(C); 8 CFR §241.6 (a). The first two ex- amples are unlike the restriction-on-removal provision in that their language simply suggests, not invalidation of the removal order’s identified country of removal, but an exten- sion of the removal period beyond 90 days.”
United States v. Xochitl Cisneros-Rodriguez, 813 F.3d 748 (9th Cir. 2015). · cites it 2× “The possibility of applying for a stay of deportation is provided not only in ICE policy, but in regulation: “The filing of a petition for U-1 nonimmigrant status has no effect on ICE’s authority to execute a final order, although the alien may file a request for a stay of…”
Jose Didiel Munoz v. John Ashcroft, Attorney Gen., 339 F.3d 950 (9th Cir. 2003). “See 8 C.F.R. § 241.6 (referring inter alia to 8 U.”
Jimenez v. Nielsen, 334 F. Supp. 3d 370 (D.D.C. 2018). · cites it 2× “All of the petitioners except Gao have requested administrative stays of removal from ICE under 8 C.F.R. § 241.6 . However, only Calderon has been granted a stay.”
Ragbir v. Homan, 923 F.3d 53 (2d Cir. 2019). “8 C.F.R. § 241.6 implements that authority: "Any request of an alien under a final order of deportation or removal for a stay of deportation or removal shall be filed .”
People v. Morales, 235 Cal. Rptr. 3d 776 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2018). “) A noncitizen may only gain relief from a final removal order if the noncitizen successfully applies for an administrative stay ( 8 C.F.R. § 241.6 ) or successfully petitions for a federal court order staying removal ( 8 U.”
Candra v. Cronen, 361 F. Supp. 3d 148 (D.D.C. 2019). · cites it 3× “Finally, because ICE's discretion to grant stays of removal comes from a regulation, not a statute, see 8 C.F.R. § 241.6 , § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) also does not preclude judicial review of Count II, see Kucana , 558 U.”
Martina L. Mungongo v. Alberto R. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 531 (7th Cir. 2007). “See 8 C.F.R. § 241.6 (a). Lastly, it appears that Ms.”
State v. Nkiam, 778 S.E.2d 863 (N.C. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “Stay of Removal on discretionary grounds ( 8 C.F.R. § 241.6 ). Although these avenues were extremely difficult to achieve, according to Mr.”
Bassam Elias Moussa v. Carol Jenifer, Dist. Dir., Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 389 F.3d 550 (6th Cir. 2004). “This refusal is a decision that is wholly within the discretion of the Attorney General un *554 der the applicable regulation, which provides that the “district director, in his or her discretion and in consideration of factors listed in 8 CFR 212.5 and section 241(c) of the…”
Fernando Mendiola-Sanchez Mario Mendiola-Araujo v. John Ashcroft, Attorney Gen., 381 F.3d 937 (9th Cir. 2004). “These family members may stay in the *942 United States, but only at the cost of separation from Fernando and Mario. Our decision need not end the Mendio-las’ fight to stay in this country.”
— 8 C.F.R. § 241.6(a) — 6 cases
United States v. Xochitl Cisneros-Rodriguez, 813 F.3d 748 (9th Cir. 2015). “The possibility of applying for a stay of deportation is provided not only in ICE policy, but in regulation: “The filing of a petition for U-1 nonimmigrant status has no effect on ICE’s authority to execute a final order, although the alien may file a request for a stay of…”
Ginters v. Cangemi, 419 F. Supp. 2d 1124 (D. Minnesota 2006).
Madrid v. Miller (D. Neb. 2025).
Lopez Lopez v. Barr (D. Minnesota 2019).
Noem (W.D. Wash. 2025).
— 8 C.F.R. § 241.6(c) — 1 case
Ortiz v. Mayorkas (D. Maryland 2023).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.