NOTICE: This opinion is subject to
formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the
United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter
of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington,
D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in
order that corrections may be made before the preliminary print
goes to press.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
_________________
No. 20–315
_________________
JOSE SANTOS SANCHEZ, et ux., PETITIONERS
v. ALEJANDRO N. MAYORKAS, SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY,
et al.
on writ of certiorari to the united states
court of appeals for the third circuit
[June 7, 2021]
Justice Kagan delivered the opinion of the
Court.
Petitioner Jose Santos Sanchez entered this
country unlawfully from El Salvador. Years later, because of unsafe
living conditions in that country, the Government granted him
Temporary Protected Status (TPS), entitling him to stay and work in
the United States for as long as those conditions persist. Sanchez
now wishes to become a lawful permanent resident (LPR) of the
United States. The question here is whether the conferral of TPS
enables him to obtain LPR status despite his unlawful entry. We
hold that it does not.
I
Section 1255 of the immigration laws provides
a way for a “nonimmigrant”—a foreign national lawfully present in
this country on a designated, temporary basis—to obtain an
“[a]djustment of status” making him an LPR. 8 U. S. C.
§1255 (boldface deleted); see §1101(a)(15) (listing classes of
nonimmigrants, such as students and tourists). Under that section,
a nonimmigrant’s eligibility for such an adjustment to permanent
status depends (with exceptions not relevant here) on an
“admission” into this country. And an “admission” is defined as
“the lawful entry of the alien into the United States after
inspection and authorization by an immigration officer.”
§1101(a)(13)(A). The admission—or, to use the definitional phrase,
“lawful entry”—requirement appears in two pertinent provisions of
§1255. One states that a nonimmigrant may become an LPR only if he
has been “inspected and admitted or paroled into the United
States.” §1255(a). And another states that a nonimmigrant who has
previously worked without authorization in the United States may
become an LPR only if his presence here is “pursuant to a lawful
admission.” §1255(k)(1); see §1255(c)(2).[
1]
A separate provision of immigration law
establishes the TPS program, which provides humanitarian relief to
foreign nationals in the United States who come from specified
countries. See §1254a. The Government may designate a country for
the program when it is beset by especially bad or dangerous
conditions, such as arise from natural disasters or armed
conflicts. The country’s citizens, if already present in the United
States, may then obtain TPS. That status protects them from removal
and authorizes them to work here for as long as the TPS designation
lasts. A person’s unlawful entry into the United States will
usually not preclude granting him TPS. See §1254a(c)(2)(A)(ii); 8
CFR §244.3 (2020). And relevant here, the TPS provision states:
“[F]or purposes of adjustment of status under section 1255,” a
person given TPS “shall be considered as being in, and maintaining,
lawful status as a nonimmigrant.” §1254a(f )(4).
Jose Santos Sanchez is a citizen of El Salvador
who has lived in the United States for more than two decades. He
entered this country unlawfully in 1997—without “inspection and
authorization by an immigration officer.” §1101(a)(13)(A). Once
here, he worked without legal authorization. In 2001, the
Government designated El Salvador under the TPS program after a
series of devastating earthquakes. Sanchez obtained TPS that year,
and has held it ever since. In 2014, he applied under §1255 for an
adjustment to LPR status.[
2]
The United States Citizenship and Immigration
Services denied Sanchez’s LPR application. Under §1255, the agency
stated, Sanchez was ineligible for LPR status because he had not
been lawfully admitted to the United States. See App. to Pet. for
Cert. 40a. And in the agency’s view, his TPS provided no way around
that bar. “Recipients of TPS,” the agency reasoned, “must still
meet the threshold requirement” of a lawful entry.
Id., at
46a. Or said otherwise: “A grant of TPS does not cure a foreign
national’s entry without inspection or constitute an inspection and
admission of the foreign national,” as demanded by §1255.
Ibid.
Sanchez challenged the decision. The District
Court granted summary judgment in his favor, relying on the
statutory mandate that a TPS recipient “shall be considered as”
having “lawful status as a nonimmigrant” for purposes of applying
to become an LPR. See
Santos Sanchez v.
Johnson, 2018
WL 6427894, *4 (D NJ, Dec. 7, 2018) (citing §1254a(f )(4);
emphasis deleted). According to the court, that provision requires
treating TPS recipients “as though [they] had been ‘inspected and
admitted.’ ”
Ibid. But the Court of Appeals for the
Third Circuit reversed, holding that “a grant of TPS does not
constitute an ‘admission’ into the United States.”
Sanchez
v.
Secretary U. S. Dept. of Homeland Security, 967 F.3d
242, 252 (2020). The court observed that “admission” and “status”
are separate concepts in immigration law.
Id., at 246. So,
the court concluded, providing a person with nonimmigrant status
(as the TPS provision does) does not mean admitting him (as §1255
requires). See
ibid.
We granted certiorari, 592 U. S. ___
(2021), to resolve a Circuit split over whether a TPS recipient who
entered the country unlawfully can still become an LPR.[
3] We now affirm the Third Circuit’s
decision that he cannot. The TPS program gives foreign nationals
nonimmigrant status, but it does not admit them. So the conferral
of TPS does not make an unlawful entrant (like Sanchez) eligible
under §1255 for adjustment to LPR status.
II
Section 1255, applied according to its plain
terms, prevents Sanchez from becoming an LPR. There is no dispute
that Sanchez “entered the United States in the late 1990s
unlawfully, without inspection.” Brief for Petitioners 13. But as
earlier described, §1255 requires an LPR applicant like Sanchez to
have entered the country “lawful[ly],” with “inspection”—that is,
to have been admitted. §1101(a)(13)(A); see
supra, at 1–2.
Indeed, §1255 imposes an admission requirement twice over. Its
principal provision states that an applicant for LPR status must
have been “inspected and admitted or paroled into the United
States.” §1255(a). And another provision says that a person who has
worked without authorization in the country—as Sanchez did for
several years—may become an LPR only if his presence in the United
States is “pursuant to a lawful admission.” §1255(k). Sanchez has
never claimed that he can, without aid from the TPS provision,
satisfy those demands for admission.[
4] A straightforward application of §1255 thus supports
the Government’s decision to deny him LPR status.
And nothing in the conferral of TPS changes that
result. As noted earlier, a TPS recipient is “considered as being
in, and maintaining, lawful status as a nonimmigrant” for the
purpose of becoming an LPR. §1254a(f )(4); see
supra,
at 2. That provision ensures that, in applying for permanent
residency, a TPS recipient will be treated as having nonimmigrant
status—even if, like Sanchez, he really does not. See §1101(a)(15)
(not including TPS recipients among the designated classes of
“nonimmigrants”). It thus guarantees that every TPS recipient has
the status traditionally and generally needed to invoke §1255’s
adjustment process. See §1255 (titled “[a]djustment of status of
nonimmigrant to that of person admitted for permanent residence”
(boldface deleted)). But the provision does not aid the TPS
recipient in meeting §1255’s independent legal-entry requirement.
Lawful status and admission, as the court below recognized, are
distinct concepts in immigration law: Establishing one does not
necessarily establish the other. See
supra, at 3–4. On the
one hand, a foreign national can be admitted but not in lawful
status—think of someone who legally entered the United States on a
student visa, but stayed in the country long past graduation. On
the other hand, a foreign national can be in lawful status but not
admitted—think of someone who entered the country unlawfully, but
then received asylum. The latter is the situation Sanchez is in,
except that he received a different kind of lawful status. The TPS
statute permits him to remain in the country; and it deems him in
nonimmigrant status for purposes of applying to become an LPR. But
the statute does not constructively “admit” a TPS recipient—that
is, “consider[ ]” him as having entered the country “after
inspection and authorization.” §1254a(f )(4); §1101(a)(13)(A).
And because a grant of TPS does not come with a ticket of
admission, it does not eliminate the disqualifying effect of an
unlawful entry.
Sanchez resists this conclusion by asserting an
“indissoluble relationship between admission and
nonimmigrant status.” Reply Brief 2 (emphasis in original).
While conceding that some forms of status (
e.g., asylum) do
not require admission, Sanchez contends that nonimmigrant status
always does: “One cannot obtain lawful nonimmigrant status without
admission.”
Ibid. In support of that claim, Sanchez points
to §1184 of the immigration laws, entitled “[a]dmission of
nonimmigrants.” And he asserts that it is impossible to “identif[y]
any category of individuals who are lawful nonimmigrants but are
not admitted—because no such category exists.” Brief for
Petitioners 20. So (Sanchez concludes) when the law provides that a
TPS recipient shall be “considered . . . as a
nonimmigrant” for purposes of §1255, it is necessarily saying that
he shall also be considered as admitted.
But to begin with, §1184 does not (as Sanchez
contends) require admission for nonimmigrant status. That provision
states that “[t]he admission to the United States of any alien as a
nonimmigrant shall be for such time and under such conditions as
the [Secretary of Homeland Security] may by regulations prescribe.”
§1184(a)(1). The section also provides that a foreign national is
“presumed to be an immigrant until” he establishes “at the time of
application for admission” that “he is entitled to a nonimmigrant
status.” §1184(b). Section 1184 thus regulates the process for
admitting foreign nationals as nonimmigrants. Suppose a foreign
national wants to be admitted to the United States as a university
student—a kind of nonimmigrant. He should look to §1184 (among
other provisions) to find out what that will entail—what he must
show and what that showing will entitle him to. Why, though, does
that matter? No one denies that most foreign nationals obtain
nonimmigrant status through an admission. So there is naturally a
section in the immigration laws that specifies how that process
works. But nothing in §1184 (or any other section) states that
admission is a prerequisite of nonimmigrant status—or otherwise
said, that the former is a necessary incident of the latter. And
that is what Sanchez needs. For without such an “indissoluble”
link, Reply Brief 2, there is no reason to view the TPS provision’s
conferral of nonimmigrant status as also a conferral of
admission.
In fact, individuals in two immigration
categories have what Sanchez says does not exist: nonimmigrant
status without admission. The first category is for “alien
crewmen”—foreign nationals who serve on board a vessel or aircraft.
§1101(a)(10). They receive nonimmigrant status when their vessel or
aircraft “land[s]” in the United States. §1101(a)(15)(D)(i). But
still the law provides that they are not “considered to have been
admitted.” §1101(a)(13)(B). The second category is for foreign
nationals who have been the victim of a serious crime in the United
States and can assist with the investigation. Those individuals may
receive nonimmigrant status even if they entered the country
unlawfully—so even if they were not admitted. See §§1101(a)(15)(U),
1182(d)(14). And §1255 specifically recognizes that possibility.
That section makes these so-called “U” nonimmigrants eligible for
LPR status if they were
either “admitted into the United
States”
or “otherwise provided nonimmigrant status.”
§1255(m)(1). There could scarcely be a plainer statement of the
daylight between nonimmigrant status and admission (except maybe
for the alien crewmen provision). And that plain statement comes in
a provision expressly enabling some unlawful entrants to adjust to
LPR status. So when Congress does not speak in that manner—when it
confers status, but says nothing about admission, for purposes of
§1255—we have no basis for ruling an unlawful entrant eligible to
become an LPR.
Sanchez objects that if the TPS provision
confers only nonimmigrant status for §1255, it accomplishes
precious little. See Reply Brief 11–13; Tr. of Oral Arg. 27. Less
than he would like, of course: It would not make him, or other TPS
recipients who entered the country unlawfully, LPR-eligible. But
some TPS recipients will benefit from the TPS provision’s conferral
of nonimmigrant status for purposes of §1255. Recall that the
provision gives all TPS recipients the status typically required to
invoke §1255—that is, nonimmigrant status. See
supra, at 5.
Some TPS recipients need exactly that assistance—without needing a
constructive admission. Consider, for example, a foreign national
who entered the country legally on a tourist visa, but stayed on
for several months after the visa’s expiration. He can satisfy
§1255’s requirement of admission, but he founders in showing
nonimmigrant status. The TPS provision relieves that difficulty and
enables him to become an LPR. Congress, of course, could have gone
further, by deeming TPS recipients to have not only nonimmigrant
status but also a lawful admission. Legislation pending in Congress
would do just that. See American Dream and Promise Act of 2021, H.
R. 6, 117th Cong., 1st Sess., §203, p. 29 (introduced Mar. 3, 2021)
(amending §1254a(f)(4) so that a TPS recipient shall be considered
“
as having been inspected and admitted into the United States,
and” as being in, and maintaining, lawful status as a
nonimmigrant” (emphasis added)). But even without that amendment,
the statute does something—and this Court does not get to say that
the something it does is not enough.
III
Section 1255 generally requires a lawful
admission before a person can obtain LPR status. Sanchez was not
lawfully admitted, and his TPS does not alter that fact. He
therefore cannot become a permanent resident of this country. We
affirm the judgment below.
It is so ordered.
Comments
Be the first to comment
Leave a Comment