IDP and Partners Release Advisory On Implications of Moncrieffe v. Holder
IDP, the American Immigration Council, and the National Immigration Project have issued a practice advisory
on the implications for drug charges and other issues involving the
categorical approach of the Supreme Court’s long-awaited decision in Moncrieffe v. Holder.
The Supreme Court held that an offense that punishes the transfer of
small amounts of marijuana for no remuneration cannot be deemed a “drug
trafficking crime” aggravated felony under the categorical approach.
The Court’s 7-2 decision is also likely to have a beneficial impact on
some other key issues regarding the proper way to assess the immigration
consequences of convictions.
The practice advisory covers: (1) the holding in Moncrieffe; (2) the decision’s potential broader implications; (3) strategies for noncitizen criminal defendants; and (4) steps that lawyers (or immigrants themselves) should take immediately in pending or already concluded removal proceedings affected by Moncrieffe.
link to practice advisory
The practice advisory covers: (1) the holding in Moncrieffe; (2) the decision’s potential broader implications; (3) strategies for noncitizen criminal defendants; and (4) steps that lawyers (or immigrants themselves) should take immediately in pending or already concluded removal proceedings affected by Moncrieffe.
link to practice advisory
