Dessalernos v. Savoretti

Background

A man facing deportation asked to have his application for suspension of deportation considered under §244(a)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. In the District Court the parties stipulated that the sole question for decision was whether he was entitled to that consideration. There had been an earlier administrative finding saying he did not meet the hardship requirement that his deportation would cause “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship,” but the case moved forward on the parties’ agreement.

Reasoning

In a per curiam opinion the Court held that the immigrant is entitled to have his application for suspension of deportation considered under §244(a)(1). The Court vacated the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remanded the case to the District Court with directions to enter a judgment declaring that the Immigration and Naturalization Service must consider the application under §244(a)(1). The Court left the factual and legal questions about eligibility to be decided on remand by the agency and the lower court.

Real world impact

This ruling requires the immigration agency and the lower courts to review the applicant’s request under §244(a)(1); it does not grant relief from deportation itself. The decision sends the case back so the agency can make any necessary findings about hardship and eligibility. Because the order directs consideration rather than a final grant, the individual’s ultimate ability to remain is still unresolved.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Harlan, joined by Justice Clark, would have dismissed for lack of a live case or controversy, arguing the administrative finding already showed ineligibility and that the stipulation could not create jurisdiction; Justice Frankfurter, unsure about the stipulation’s scope, joined the Court’s opinion rather than the dissent.