8 C.F.R. § 241.8

Reinstatement of removal orders

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

(a) Applicability. An alien who illegally reenters the United States after having been removed, or having departed voluntarily, while under an order of exclusion, deportation, or removal shall be removed from the United States by reinstating the prior order. The alien has no right to a hearing before an immigration judge in such circumstances. In establishing whether an alien is subject to this section, the immigration officer shall determine the following:

(1) Whether the alien has been subject to a prior order of removal. The immigration officer must obtain the prior order of exclusion, deportation, or removal relating to the alien.

(2) The identity of the alien, i.e., whether the alien is in fact an alien who was previously removed, or who departed voluntarily while under an order of exclusion, deportation, or removal. In disputed cases, verification of identity shall be accomplished by a comparison of fingerprints between those of the previously excluded, deported, or removed alien contained in Service records and those of the subject alien. In the absence of fingerprints in a disputed case the alien shall not be removed pursuant to this paragraph.

(3) Whether the alien unlawfully reentered the United States. In making this determination, the officer shall consider all relevant evidence, including statements made by the alien and any evidence in the alien's possession. The immigration officer shall attempt to verify an alien's claim, if any, that he or she was lawfully admitted, which shall include a check of Service data systems available to the officer.

(b) Notice. If an officer determines that an alien is subject to removal under this section, he or she shall provide the alien with written notice of his or her determination. The officer shall advise the alien that he or she may make a written or oral statement contesting the determination. If the alien wishes to make such a statement, the officer shall allow the alien to do so and shall consider whether the alien's statement warrants reconsideration of the determination.

(c) Order. If the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section are met, the alien shall be removed under the previous order of exclusion, deportation, or removal in accordance with section 241(a)(5) of the Act.

(d) Exception for applicants for benefits under section 902 of HRIFA or sections 202 or 203 of NACARA. If an alien who is otherwise subject to this section has applied for adjustment of status under either section 902 of Division A of Public Law 105-277, the Haitian Refugee Immigrant Fairness Act of 1998 (HRIFA), or section 202 of Public Law 105-100, the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA), the provisions of section 241(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall not apply. The immigration officer may not reinstate the prior order in accordance with this section unless and until a final decision to deny the application for adjustment has been made. If the application for adjustment of status is granted, the prior order shall be rendered moot.

(e) Exception for withholding of removal. If an alien whose prior order of removal has been reinstated under this section expresses a fear of returning to the country designated in that order, the alien shall be immediately referred to an asylum officer for an interview to determine whether the alien has a reasonable fear of persecution or torture pursuant to § 208.31 of this chapter.

(f) Execution of reinstated order. Execution of the reinstated order of removal and detention of the alien shall be administered in accordance with this part.

[62 FR 10378, Mar. 6, 1997, as amended at 64 FR 8495, Feb. 19, 1999; 66 FR 29451, May 31, 2001]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 283 cases (66 in the last 5 years), 1998–2026 · leading case: Raul Morales-Izquierdo v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General
Raul Morales-Izquierdo v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General (2007) ca9 · cites it 25× “§ 1231 (a)(5) and 8 C.F.R. § 241.8 . Morales petitioned here for review of the reinstatement order.”
Morales-Izquierdo v. Gonzales (2007) ca9 · cites it 47× “When Morales and his wife met with the INS in January 2003, an immigration officer served them with a denial of the I-130 petition and a notice of intent to reinstate Morales’ removal order in accordance with INA § 241(a)(5), 8 U.”
Garcia-Villeda v. Mukasey (2008) ca2 · cites it 16× “The issues before us are whether elimination of the requirement of a hearing before an immigration judge, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 241.8 (2001), is consistent with the reinstatement of removal statute, 8 U.”
M. Fatima Guijosa De Sandoval v. U.S. Atty. Gen. (2006) ca11 · cites it 22× “In her petition, Petitioner advances four arguments, each of which presents an issue of first impression in our circuit: (1) the Attorney General exceeded his authority in promulgating 8 C.F.R. § 241.8 , which empowers an immigration officer, rather than an immigration judge, to…”
Alejandro Villa-Anguiano v. Eric H. Holder Jr. (2013) ca9 · cites it 25× “§ 1231 (a)(5) and 8 C.F.R. § 241.8 . Villa concedes that he was provided notice and an opportunity to contest reinstatement on May 4, 2008, as required by 8 C.”
Rafael Guerrero-Sanchez v. Warden York County Prison (2018) ca3 · cites it 8× “An asylum officer subsequently conducted a reasonable-fear interview at Guerrero-Sanchez’s request, see 8 C.F.R. § 241.8 (e), where Guerrero-Sanchez contended that he would be tortured by a drug cartel if removed to Mexico.”
Lorenzo v. Mukasey (2007) ca10 · cites it 10× “Second, Lorenzo alleges DHS, in reinstating her prior order of removal, failed to comply with 8 C.F.R. § 241.8 , which provides the procedure for reinstating removal orders under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).”
Garcia-Garcia v. Sessions (2017) ca1 · cites it 8× “First, 8 C.F.R. § 241.8 (a) requires that an alien "who illegally reenters the United States after having been removed .”
Silvia Ayala v. Jefferson Sessions (2017) ca9 · cites it 5× “Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 241.8 (e), Ayala had the right to have her reasonable fear claim heard by an asylum officer and then reviewed by an immigration judge (IJ).”
Bhaktibhai-Patel v. Garland (2022) ca2 · cites it 6× “at 2282 (citing 8 C.F.R. §§ 241.8 (a)-(c), 1241.8(a)-(c)).”
Sonia Calla Mejia v. Jefferson Sessions III (2017) ca4 · cites it 8× “To effectuate § 1231(a)(5), the Attorney General promulgated 8 C.F.R. § 241.8 . Typically, under this regulation, if an immigration officer determines: (1) “the alien has been subject to a prior order of removal”; (2) “the alien is in fact [the] alien who was previously…”
Pierrot Bejjani v. Immigration and Naturalization Service John Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States (2001) ca6 · cites it 6× “Under the new regulation, 8 C.F.R. § 241.8 , the alien has no right to a hearing before an immigration judge.”
— 8 C.F.R. § 241.8(a) — 3 cases
Salazar v. Ashcroft (2002) ca3
— 8 C.F.R. § 241.8(b) — 2 cases
Martinez v. McAleenan (2019) ilsd
Martinez v. Nielsen (2019) nysd
— 8 C.F.R. § 241.8(c) — 1 case
Salazar v. Ashcroft (2002) ca3
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.