Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Pedro Pablo Guerrero-Lasprilla v. William P. Barr, Attorney General

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, No. 17-60333 · judgment September 12, 2018

Decided · March 23, 2020

Pre-decision estimate: 15% cert probability (95% interval 11%–21%)

Before the decision, about 3.7× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for counsel who has won certiorari before, a Fifth Circuit decision below, and a circuit split argued in the petition.

Question presented

Consolidated with 18-1015. The deadline to file a statutory motion to reopen under 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7) is subject to equitable tolling; all the courts of appeals are in agreement. But they are in conflict as to whether they have jurisdiction to review an agency's denial of a request for equitable tolling made by someone subject to the "criminal alien bar" pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C). The Fifth and Fourth circuit say review of equitable tolling is a "question of fact" precluded from review under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C). In contrast, the Ninth circuit says equitable tolling is a "mixed question," i.e., "a question of law," which falls under the jurisdictional savings clause under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D ). Therefore, the question presented is: Is a request for equitable tolling, as it applies to statutory motions to reopen, judicially reviewable as a "question of law?"

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Paul Whitfield Hughes
McDermott Will & Emery

For respondent
Noel John Francisco
Jones Day

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences

Amicus briefs
3 merits
(3 supporting pet./neither)

Related
Vide, 18-1015

Argument & decision

Argued December 9, 2019 — Paul W. Hughes · Frederick Liu. Audio and transcript

Decided March 23, 2020. Opinion by Breyer.

Proceedings

Apr 24 2020
JUDGMENT ISSUED.
Mar 23 2020
Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Breyer, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Alito, J., joined as to all but Part II-A-1. VIDED.
Dec 09 2019
Argued. For petitioners: Paul W. Hughes, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Frederick Liu, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. VIDED.
Nov 20 2019
Reply of petitioners filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Oct 25 2019
CIRCULATED
Oct 23 2019
Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 5th Circuit.
Oct 21 2019
Brief of respondent William P. Barr, Attorney General filed. VIDED
Sep 13 2019
SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, December 9, 2019. VIDED.
Sep 05 2019
Brief amici curiae of Scholars of Habeas Corpus Law filed. VIDED.
Sep 05 2019
Brief amici curiae of American Immigration Council, et al. filed. VIDED.
Sep 05 2019
Brief amicus curiae of American Civil Liberties Union filed.
Aug 29 2019
Joint appendix filed. VIDED. (Statement of costs filed)
Aug 29 2019
Brief of petitioner Pedro Pablo Guerrero-Lasprilla filed. VIDED.
Jul 16 2019
Joint motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioners' brief on the merits is extended to and including August 29, 2019. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including October 21, 2019. VIDED.
Jul 11 2019
Joint motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed. VIDED.
Jun 24 2019
Petition GRANTED. The petition for a writ of certiorari in No. 18-1015 is granted limited to Question 2 presented by the petition. The cases are consolidated, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. VIDED.
Jun 24 2019
Because the Court has consolidated these cases for briefing and oral argument, future filings and activity in the cases will now be reflected on the docket of No. 18-776. Subsequent filings in these cases must therefore be submitted through the electronic filing system in No. 18-776. Each document submitted in connection with one or more of these cases must include on its cover the case number and caption for each case in which the filing is intended to be submitted. Where a filing is submitted in fewer than all of the cases, the docket entry will reflect the case number(s) in which the filing is submitted; a document filed in all of the consolidated cases will be noted as “VIDED.”
Jun 24 2019
As Rule 34.6 provides, “If the Court schedules briefing and oral argument in a case that was governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c) or Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 49.1(c), the parties shall submit electronic versions of all prior and subsequent filings with this Court in the case, subject to [applicable] redaction rules.” Subsequent party and amicus filings in the case should now be submitted through the Court’s electronic filing system, with any necessary redactions. VIDED. (September 4, 2019).
Jun 17 2019
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/20/2019.
May 28 2019
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/13/2019.
May 23 2019
Reply of petitioner Pedro Pablo Guerrero-Lasprilla filed.
Mar 21 2019
Brief of respondent William P. Barr, Attorney General in opposition filed.
Feb 13 2019
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including March 21, 2019.
Feb 12 2019
Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 19, 2019 to March 21, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
Jan 10 2019
Motion to extend the time to file a response from January 18, 2019 to February 19, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
Jan 10 2019
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including February 19, 2019.
Dec 10 2018
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 18, 2019)
Dec 10 2018
Pursuant to Rule 34.6 and Paragraph 9 of the Guidelines for the Submission of Documents to the Supreme Court's Electronic Filing System, filings in this case should be submitted in paper form only, and should not be submitted through the Court's electronic filing system.