Urias-Orellana v. Bondi · ¶41

Our decisions in Wilkinson v. Garland, 601 U. S. 209 (2024), and Guerrero-Lasprilla v. Barr, 589 U. S. 221 (2020), are not to the contrary. In those cases, we held that a mixed question of law and fact could qualify as a “question of law” exempt from § 1252(a)'s bar on judicial review. 601 U. S., at 212; 589 U. S., at 225. But unlike § 1252(b), § 1252(a) does not speak to the standards of review for removal orders; rather, it addresses a court's ability to review removal orders at all. As a result, whether a given issue is treated as a question of law exempt from the INA's jurisdiction- stripping provisions tells us nothing about the type of review the court must afford to that issue under other provisions of the statute. See Wilkinson, 601 U. S., at 222 (recognizing that the INA's jurisdiction-stripping provisions do not govern the standard of review); Guerrero-Lasprilla, 589 U. S., at…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.