The Supreme Court on Monday ruled against a non-U.S. citizen who was contesting his indictment for unlawful re-entry into the country on the basis that it was wrong to remove him in the first place.
In United States v. Palomar-Santiago, a Mexican citizen who obtained lawful permanent residency in the United States in 1990. Eight years later, he was deported for a California conviction for driving under the influence. But after his deportation, the Supreme Court ruled in Leocal v. Ashcroft that, under the relevant federal statute, DUI convictions are not necessarily removable offenses for people like Palomar-Santiago.
Another 13 years later, in 2018, Palomar-Santiago was found back in the United States and was indicted for illegally re-entering the country after being deported. He sought to dismiss the indictment, arguing that the Supreme Court’s decision in Leocal meant that his original removal order was invalid. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit sided with him, but the Supreme Court disagreed.