Guerrero-Lasprilla v. Barr

Pedro Guerrero-Lasprilla and Ruben Ovalles (plaintiffs) were aliens living in the United States. Both individuals committed drug crimes and became removable under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Guerrero-Lasprilla and Ovalles were ordered removed, the orders became final, and both men left the country. The INA allowed a person to file a motion to reopen a removal proceeding within 90 days of a final removal order’s entry. The window closed for Guerrero-Lasprilla and Ovalles, but both men petitioned the Board of Immigration Appeals (board) (defendant) to reopen, citing a Fifth Circuit precedent stating that the 90-day time limit could be equitably tolled. The board denied both petitions, finding that Guerrero-Lasprilla and Ovalles had not demonstrated the due diligence required for equitable tolling of the time limit. Guerrero-Lasprilla and Ovalles appealed to the Fifth Circuit for review. The Fifth Circuit denied the requests for review, finding that the appellate court did not have jurisdiction under the INA to review the order because the issue of Guerrero-Lasprilla and Ovalles’s due diligence was not a question of law. Guerrero-Lasprilla and Ovalles petitioned the United States Supreme Court for review. The Court consolidated both cases and granted certiorari to determine whether the phrase question of law, as used in INA § 242, included the application of a legal standard to undisputed or established fact.