In Niz-Chavez v. Garland, 141 S. Ct. 1474 (2021), the Supreme Court held that a Notice to Appear must convey the time and place of the hearing in a single document in order to trigger the stop-time rule in cancellation of removal cases, and that a subsequently-issued hearing notice does not stop time if the Notice to Appear did not include the required information. The rationale underlying the Court’s decision, however, more broadly affects both ongoing and closed cases initiated by defective Notices to Appear and builds upon the Supreme Court’s decision in Pereira v. Sessions, 138 S. Ct. 2105 (2018).
This practice advisory, by the American Immigration Council, Catholic Legal Immigration Network, and National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild provides:
• An overview of the Niz-Chavez v. Garland decision and its impact on eligibility for cancellation of removal;
• A discussion of the potential effects of the decision on eligibility for post-conclusion voluntary departure;
• Broader applications of the decision, including potential arguments for seeking termination of removal proceedings or rescission and reopening of in absentia removal orders based on defective Notices to Appear; and
• Vehicle, timing, and geographical considerations when raising Niz-Chavez v. Garland-based arguments.
