8 U.S.C. § 1254

Repealed. Pub. L. 104–208, div. C, title III, § 308(b)(7), Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009–615

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 8 CasesGoogle Scholar

[repealed]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1,326 cases (16 in the last 5 years), 1949–2026 · leading case: Immigr. & Naturalization Serv. v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983).
Immigr. & Naturalization Serv. v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983). · cites it 14× “216 , as amended, 8 U. S. C. § 1254 (c)(2), authorizing one House of Congress, by resolution, to invalidate the decision of the Executive Branch, pursuant to authority delegated by Congress to the Attorney General of the United States, to allow a particular deportable alien to…”
Fernandez-Vargas v. Gonzales, 548 U.S. 30 (2006). · cites it 5× “, 8 U. S. C. §1254 (a)(1) (1994 ed.) (suspension of deportation available to aliens who main tained a continuous presence in the United States for seven years and could demonstrate extreme hardship and a good moral character).”
Hernandez De Anderson v. Gonzales, 497 F.3d 927 (9th Cir. 2007). · cites it 10× “Second, she contends that the BIA's holding *930 that she was ineligible to apply for suspension of deportation under former Immigration and Nationality Act ("INA") § 244(a)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1254 (a)(2) (repealed 1997), is an impermissibly retroactive application of the Illegal…”
Immigr. & Naturalization Serv. v. Phinpathya, 464 U.S. 183 (1984). · cites it 7× “§ 1254 (a)(1), Congress provided that the Attorney General in his discretion may suspend deportation and adjust the status of an otherwise deportable alien who (1) “has been physically present in the United States for a continuous period of not less than seven years”; (2) “is a…”
Kishin Ramchand Balani v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 669 F.2d 1157 (6th Cir. 1982). · cites it 7× “The issue in this proceeding is whether the Board of Immigration Appeals abused its discretion by denying Petitioner’s motion to re-open his deportation proceedings in order to apply for discretionary relief of suspension of deportation pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1254 (a)(1), upon…”
Romalez, 23 I. & N. Dec. 423 (BIA 2002). · cites it 7× “In this respect, the statute parallels its predecessor suspension of deportation provisions at section 244(a) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1254 (a) (1982). For example, former section 244(a)(1) specified, in part, that an applicant for suspension of deportation must have “been…”
Patricio Hernandez-Cordero & Maria Guadalupe Ortega De Hernandez v. United States Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 819 F.2d 558 (5th Cir. 1987). · cites it 12× “8 U.S.C. § 1254 (a)(1). We affirm. I. Mr.”
Briseno-Flores v. Attorney Gen. of US, 492 F.3d 226 (3rd Cir. 2007). · cites it 5× “Jesus Briseno-Flores (“Briseno”) petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (the designation “BIA”) denying him suspension of deportation under the statute in effect at the time he applied for that relief, § 244(a)(1) of the Immigration and…”
Pablo Mejia-Castanon v. Attorney Gen. United States, 931 F.3d 224 (3rd Cir. 2019). · cites it 8× “he INA provided that “the Attorney General may, in his discretion, suspend deportation” of an alien if he (1) had “been 4 physically present in the United States for a continuous period of not less than seven years immediately preceding the date of such application;” (2)…”
Jens Michelson v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 897 F.2d 465 (10th Cir. 1990). · cites it 8× “Petitioner Jens Michelson petitions for review of a final order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal from the order of an immigration judge finding him to be deportable and denying him a voluntary departure under § 244(e) of the Immigration and Nationality…”
Laura Luis Hernandez v. John Ashcroft, Attorney Gen., 345 F.3d 824 (9th Cir. 2003). · cites it 4× “The former section 244 of the INA provided a method for certain aliens to establish eligibility for a discretionary suspension of deportation and obtain a grant of lawful status. Section 244(a)(3) was added to the INA as part of the passage of the Violence Against Women Act of…”
Narciso Edgardo Inciong Villena v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 622 F.2d 1352 (9th Cir. 1980). · cites it 8× “The appeal to the Board was from the order of the immigration judge denying Villena’s application for suspension of deportation under § 244 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1254 . The motion to reopen was filed while that appeal was pending and was…”
— 8 U.S.C. § 1254(a) — 6 cases
Chim Ming v. Marks, 367 F. Supp. 673 (S.D.N.Y. 1973).
United States ex rel. Partheniades v. Shaughnessy, 146 F. Supp. 772 (S.D.N.Y. 1956).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1254(a)(1) — 3 cases
Pareja v. Attorney Gen. of the United States, 615 F.3d 180 (3rd Cir. 2010).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1254(c) — 1 case
— 8 U.S.C. § 1254(e) — 4 cases
Langhammer v. Hamilton, 194 F. Supp. 854 (D. Mass. 1961).
Onyeme v. INS (4th Cir. 1998).
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.