Donald Trump can’t believe it. These justices just did the unexpected.
And two Supreme Court justices just betrayed Trump with a disturbing ruling.
Supreme Court Extends Immigration Deadline in Narrow Ruling
In a closely watched decision on Tuesday, Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Chief Justice John Roberts joined their left-leaning colleagues to deliver a 5-4 ruling in an immigration appeals case, offering a potential glimpse into the court’s perspective as it prepares for a wave of significant immigration-related legal battles.
The case, Monsalvo Velazquez v. Bondi, focused on the interpretation of a 60-day “voluntary departure” deadline, a provision allowing certain immigrants of “good moral character” to leave the United States on their own terms within the specified period.
The Supreme Court, with the support of Roberts and Gorsuch, determined that if the 60-day deadline falls on a weekend or a U.S. legal holiday, it should be extended to the next business day.
Justice Gorsuch, writing for the majority, emphasized that this interpretation aligns with established administrative practices, particularly in immigration law.
“When Congress adopts a new law against the backdrop of a ‘long-standing administrative construction,’ the Court generally presumes the new provision works in harmony with what came before,” Gorsuch explained.
He further noted that since the 1950s, immigration regulations have defined “day” in deadlines to exclude Sundays, legal holidays, and later Saturdays, a practice reflected in the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act.
Gorsuch was joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Chief Justice Roberts in the majority opinion.
The decision overturned rulings by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals and the Board of Immigration Appeals, which had rejected this interpretation in the case of Monsalvo Velázquez, a 32-year-old Colorado resident facing removal since 2019.
While the case itself hinges on technical aspects of immigration procedures, its slim majority could signal the court’s leanings as it approaches a series of high-stakes immigration cases.
These include disputes over due process protections for migrants and nationwide injunctions challenging President Donald Trump’s proposed birthright citizenship ban.
Dissenting justices—Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett—argued that the court lacked jurisdiction to rule on the matter. Justice Thomas suggested remanding the case to the lower court to address unresolved issues, while Justice Barrett questioned the appeal’s validity.
In a separate dissent, Justice Alito argued that the 60-day period should be straightforward, including weekends. “There will always be a sympathetic pro se alien who is a day or two late,” Alito wrote.
“Unless the Court is willing to extend the statutory deadline indefinitely, it would presumably be forced to say in such cases that a day too late is just too bad.” He added, “For this reason, sympathy for petitioner cannot justify the Court’s decision.”
This narrow ruling arrives just weeks before May 15, when the Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in a blockbuster case challenging President Trump’s attempt to end birthright citizenship—a case widely regarded as one of the most significant since his inauguration.
As the court navigates these complex issues, its decisions will likely shape the future of immigration policy in the United States.
Stay tuned to the Conservative Column.
