U.S. Code » Title 6 » Chapter CHAPTER 1— HOMELAND SECURITY ORGANIZATION › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER IV— BORDER, MARITIME, AND TRANSPORTATION SECURITY › Part Part D— Immigration Enforcement Functions

6 U.S.C. § 251

Transfer of functions

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 6 CasesGoogle Scholar
In accordance with subchapter XII (relating to transition provisions), there shall be transferred from the Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization to the Secretary all functions performed under the following programs, and all personnel, assets, and liabilities pertaining to such programs, immediately before such transfer occurs:(1) The Border Patrol program.(2) The detention and removal program.(3) The intelligence program.(4) The investigations program.(5) The inspections program.(Pub. L. 107–296, title IV, § 441, Nov. 25, 2002, 116 Stat. 2192; Pub. L. 114–125, title VIII, § 802(g)(1)(B)(v)(I), Feb. 24, 2016, 130 Stat. 212.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2016—Pub. L. 114–125 substituted “Transfer of functions” for “Transfer of functions to Under Secretary for Border and Transportation Security” in section catchline and “Secretary” for “Under Secretary for Border and Transportation Security” in introductory provisions.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 97 cases (30 in the last 5 years), 2003–2026 · leading case: Dep't of Homeland Sec. v. Thuraissigiam, 140 S. Ct. 1959 (2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dep't of Homeland Sec. v. Thuraissigiam, 140 S. Ct. 1959 (2020). · cites it 2× “See 6 U. S. C. §251 (2) (transferring authority over “[t]he detention and removal program” to the Department).”
Clark v. Martinez, 543 U.S. 371 (2005). · cites it 2× “2192 , 2193, 2196, 6 U. S. C. §§ 251 (2), 252(a)(3), 271(b) (2000 ed.”
Jama v. Immigr. & Customs Enf't, 543 U.S. 335 (2005). · cites it 2× “2192 -2194, 6 U. S. C. §§ 251 (2), 252(a) (2000 ed., Supp.”
Hernandez Lara v. Lyons, 10 F.4th 19 (1st Cir. 2021). · cites it 2× “6 U.S.C. § 251 . - 63 - should be detained, applying a presumption in favor of liberty that could be overcome by a showing that he posed a "threat to national security" or was a "poor bail risk.”
Santiago-Rodriguez v. Holder, 657 F.3d 820 (9th Cir. 2011). · cites it 2× “2135 , 2192, 2205 (codified at 6 U.S.C. §§ 251 , 291); Morales-Izquierdo v.”
Make The Road New York v. Chad F. Wolf, 962 F.3d 612 (D.C. Cir. 2020). · cites it 2× “§ 1103 (a); see also 6 U.S.C. § 251 ; Clark v. Martinez, 543 U.”
Sameh Sami S. Khouzam, A/K/A Sameh Sami Khouzam, A/K/A Sameh S. Khouzam, A/K/A Sameh Khouzam v. John Ashcroft, Attorney Gen. of the United States, 361 F.3d 161 (2d Cir. 2004). “2135 , 2192, 6 U.S.C. § 251 (West Supp.2003) — that the U.”
Chehazeh v. Attorney Gen. of United States, 666 F.3d 118 (3rd Cir. 2012). · cites it 2× “” (citing 6 U.S.C. §§ 251 , 271 & 291)). 9 INS‟s earlier appeal, and, therefore, it was not new.”
Wash. All. of Tech. Workers v. U.S. Dep't of Homeland SEC., 892 F.3d 332 (D.C. Cir. 2018). “For consistency and ease of reference, we refer to the DHS throughout the opinion as the responsible government agency even though the INS exercised the relevant authority before 2002. Washtech asserted multiple alternative standing theories in its brief.”
Ninoska Suate-Orellana v. Merrick Garland, 101 F.4th 624 (9th Cir. 2024). “See 6 U.S.C. § 251 . SUATE-ORELLANA V. GARLAND 15 because § 1231(a)(5) does not “unmistakably” speak in jurisdictional terms, it is a non-jurisdictional rule.”
D.B. ex rel. R.M.B. v. Cardall, 826 F.3d 721 (4th Cir. 2016). “See 6 U.S.C. §§ 251 (2), 279. Pursuant to the HSA's savings *736 provisions, the reference to the Attorney General in § 1226(a) with respect to the detention function must be "deemed to refer” to the appropriate officials of those transferee agencies.”
Raul Morales-Izquierdo v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney Gen., 486 F.3d 484 (9th Cir. 2007). “2135 , 2192, 2205 (codified at 6 U.S.C. §§ 251 , 291). To minimize confusion, we use the term "INS,” even when referring to DHS’ successor to the INS-U.”
Show all 97 citing cases →
— 6 U.S.C. § 251(4) — 1 case
Auth. to Obtain & Share Statewide Voter Roll Data (OLC 2026).
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.