Robledo Response to Motion to Dismiss - Surviving Spouses ...

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. THE COURT HAS JURISDICTION ..................................................................................1
A. This Court has Jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ Claims Notwithstanding the Existence
of Removal Proceedings ..........................................................................................2
B. Exhaustion Is Not Required.....................................................................................5
C. The IIRIA and REAL ID Act’s Jurisdictional Stripping Provisions Are Not
Applicable to Plaintiffs’ Claims...............................................................................7
D. The Exercise of Jurisdiction is Consistent with Congressional Intent...................16
E. This Court Has Jurisdiction under The Mandamus Act.........................................18
II.
THE STATUTE IS CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS IN THAT PLAINTIFFS REMAIN
SPOUSES FOR PURPOSES OF IMMEDIATE RELATIVE CLASSIFICATION AND
ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS ...........................................................................................19
A. Statutory Scheme, Definitions of “Immediate Relative” and “Spouse”................19
B. The Ordinary Meaning of the Term “Spouse” Includes a Surviving Spouse........25
C. Subsequent Legislation Is Not Dispositive............................................................30
D. Chevron Deference Is Not Appropriate When The Statute Is Unambiguous Or
When An Agency’s Interpretation Is Impermissible Because It Is Based On A
Discredited Agency Opinion..................................................................................33
III.
IV.
PLAINTIFF HASSAN’S STATUS IS IN DISPUTE........................................................38
CONCLUSION..................................................................................................................39
- i -