Plain-English summary
Court: 8 U.S.C. §1252(d)(1) is not jurisdictional; exhaustion is a claim-processing rule
The Court held that the statutory requirement that noncitizens exhaust administrative remedies before seeking review in federal court (8 U.S.C. §1252(d)(1)) is not a jurisdictional bar. The Fifth Circuit’s sua sponte dismissal for lack of jurisdiction was vacated in part and the case remanded.
Why this matters
This decision limits courts’ power to dismiss immigration appeals on their own motion for lack of jurisdiction based solely on the exhaustion statute. It gives federal courts more flexibility to consider whether exhaustion was waived, forfeited, or excused, and affects how and when immigrants and the government must raise procedural defenses in removal litigation.
Who may feel it
- Noncitizens challenging removal orders in federal court
- Immigration judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals
- Federal courts that review immigration cases
- Immigration attorneys and legal services providers
- The Department of Justice and the government in removal proceedings
Key questions
- Is 8 U.S.C. §1252(d)(1)’s requirement to "exhaust all administrative remedies as of right" a jurisdictional bar that federal courts must enforce on their own?