Motion to Pretermit the Cancellation of Removal Application denied as we showed sufficient evidence that he did not plead to trafficking, but rather to simple possession.
The Legal Impact of a Denied Motion to Response and Opposition to a Motion to Pretermit
The legal phrase “Court Denies Opposition to Motion to Pretermit” carries significant weight in U.S. immigration proceedings. This is particularly true in cases involving applications for relief like Asylum or Cancellation of Removal. Understanding this ruling requires defining “pretermit.” A motion to response is often filed to challenge motions effectively.
To “pretermit” an application means the Immigration Judge (IJ) refuses to consider it or proceed to an evidentiary hearing on its merits. This happens when the IJ determines the application is legally insufficient on its face. Meaning, even if all the noncitizen’s factual claims are true, they still fail to meet the basic legal requirements (prima facie eligibility) for that form of relief.
When a noncitizen (the respondent) files an Opposition arguing against the motion to pretermit (usually filed by DHS), they are fighting for their right to a full hearing. However, crafting a motion to response can strengthen their case. This is effective if presented with comprehensive legal arguments.
The Consequence of a Denied Opposition
The ruling, “Court Denies Opposition to Motion to Pretermit,” is a major blow to the respondent. It signifies that the court:
- Agreed with the Motion to Pretermit: It upheld the decision to stop considering the application.
- Rejected the Noncitizen’s Arguments: It found the respondent’s legal arguments for proceeding to a hearing unpersuasive. However, a well-crafted motion to response might alter such outcomes in other cases.
The immediate impact is that the application for relief is effectively terminated without the noncitizen ever getting a chance to testify. They cannot present evidence on the substance of their claim, such as proving their fear of persecution for asylum. The underlying removal order is often then finalized, putting the noncitizen at risk of imminent deportation. This typically forces the noncitizen’s counsel to appeal the pretermission to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).