Millions of foreigners strive to become Lawful Permanent Residents of the United States, but that status is limited to those immigrants who meet certain requirements and comply with extensive procedures. There is ample U.S. case law interpreting what it means to be “lawfully admitted for permanent residence.” Until the Sixth Circuit’s decision in 2017 in Kamal Turfah v. United States Citizenship & Immigration Services, however, no circuit court had found that a solely procedural error committed by U.S. immigration authorities could prevent an otherwise eligible immigrant from receiving lawful admission for Lawful Permanent Residency. This Comment assesses the unique situation that the plaintiff in Turfah presented when he was deemed unlawfully admitted, not because of his lack of entitlement to lawful permanent residency, but because U.S. immigration authorities failed to prevent him from entering the country before his father. Further, this Comment analyzes the consequences of the Sixth Circuit’s decision that places an undue burden on immigrants to ensure that immigration authorities are not negligent in their duties, as well as leaves immigrants who were otherwise entitled to lawful permanent residency with their status in flux and with no clear pathway to naturalization.
Rebecca Hayes, Lawful Permanent Residency: What the United States Citizenship & Immigration Services Giveth, It Can Also Take Away, 59 B.C.L. Rev. E. Supp. 329 (2018), http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/bclr/vol59/iss9/19