Мы говорим по-русски
Decisions · 593 U.S. 155 (2021)

Niz-Chavez v. Garland

The Supreme Court held that the cancellation stop-time rule requires a single notice containing the required statutory information. It rejected combining separate documents to satisfy that specific trigger.

Published:

Scope and purpose

The government supplied charges in one document and hearing details later. The Court construed the statutory wording to require the information in one notice for stop-time purposes; it did not automatically award cancellation of removal.

Related rules and practical context

Read the holding with Pereira, INA §240A and the actual Form I-862 record. Jurisdiction, notice objections and eligibility can raise different questions. Later authority and the procedural posture remain important.

Primary sources

General reference information, not legal advice. A summary does not replace the statute or full decision. Check applicability and subsequent developments before filing. Publication does not imply attorney legal review or create an attorney-client relationship.

Frequently asked questions

What is Niz-Chavez v. Garland?

The Supreme Court held that the cancellation stop-time rule requires a single notice containing the required statutory information. It rejected combining separate documents to satisfy that specific trigger.

What should I check before relying on this information?

Read the holding with Pereira, INA §240A and the actual Form I-862 record. Jurisdiction, notice objections and eligibility can raise different questions. Later authority and the procedural posture remain important.

Book a Consultation