In Alejos-Perez v. Garland, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a previous decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). The petitioner in this case argued against a state-level drug conviction. He claimed there was a “realistic probability” that Texas would use a state statute to prosecute him for possessing a drug not illegal under federal law.
The court found the petitioner’s argument unconvincing. It agreed with the BIA’s conclusion. The petitioner had failed to prove this “realistic probability” existed. Therefore, the court upheld the BIA’s original ruling.
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (covering Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi) plays an outsized role in immigration law. This is because it sits over border-heavy jurisdictions. It frequently decides high-impact removal, asylum, and enforcement matters. Fifth Circuit opinions govern lower federal courts and immigration courts within the circuit. Therefore, they shape how adjudicators treat issues like statutory interpretation, jurisdictional limits, detention, habeas petitions, and procedural safeguards. The court’s rulings also influence administrative-law doctrines. For example, the degree of deference owed to agency interpretations and frequently intersect with criminal collateral-attack questions that affect removability and relief eligibility.
Practitioners should note three practical consequences. First, circuit precedent is binding in the Fifth Circuit. Therefore, immigration strategies that succeed elsewhere may fail here if controlling Fifth Circuit authority differs. Second, the Fifth Circuit’s caseload often involves emergency applications — stays of removal, injunctions against enforcement policies, or preliminary relief. So timing and appellate posture matter. Rapid appellate briefing and clear stay standards are crucial. Third, because the circuit covers major ports of entry and large detained populations, its decisions commonly address detention standards, bond, and conditions of confinement. These areas generate both individual habeas litigation and classwide remedies.
When a Fifth Circuit decision creates an unfavorable rule or a split with other circuits, counsel should evaluate options. They might distinguish the precedent on its facts or seek en banc rehearing where justified. Otherwise, they can preserve a certiorari path to the Supreme Court in cases of national significance. Conversely, favorable Fifth Circuit precedent can be deployed aggressively at the immigration-court level and in federal habeas petitions. This can be used to obtain releases, reopenings, or vacatur of adverse outcomes.
For clients, the practical takeaway is straightforward: if your case lies in Texas, Louisiana, or Mississippi—or raises issues the Fifth Circuit has addressed—get appellate-aware counsel early. Mapping circuit precedent onto your facts, preparing emergency filings, and preserving appellate issues can mean the difference between removal and a successful route to relief.