Contreras-Salinas v. Holder
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
585 F.3d 710 (2009)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Ysabel Contreras-Salinas (plaintiff) was a citizen of Peru. Contreras came to the United States in October 1994 as a nonimmigrant visitor. Approximately two months later, Contreras married Ramon Arroyo, a U.S. citizen. Contreras’s residency status was changed to conditional permanent resident. In April 1997, Contreras and Arroyo separated before Contreras could finalize her status as a permanent U.S. resident. Contreras filed a petition for a good-faith marriage waiver of the permanent-residency requirements under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA), 8 U.S.C. ch. 12. The United States Department of Homeland Security denied Contreras’s waiver request, finding that Contreras had failed to prove that her marriage to Arroyo was entered into in good faith. After a hearing, an immigration judge under delegated authority from the attorney general affirmed the denial, finding that much of Contreras’s evidence, including her affidavits and testimony, was not credible. Contreras appealed. The Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed Contreras’s appeal. Contreras appealed again, arguing that the immigration judge had failed to weigh certain material evidence.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.