View Full Version : SCOTUS: Vartelas v. Holder - Possible effects on Enos v. Holder?

02-26-2012, 7:42 PM
This case is about a lawful permanent resident who was convicted of securities counterfeiting. A few years later, Mr. Vartelas left the United States to visit Greece, and upon his return to JFK Airport, he was given additional scrutiny by Immigrations Customs because of his past conviction. Later, he was served with a notice to appear for removal proceedings by Immigration, and he of course appealed.

According to the Oyez site:

Vartelas, through new counsel, subsequently filed a motion to reopen with the Board of Immigration Appeals. The motion to reopen claimed that Vartelas’ prior counsel was ineffective having failed to raise the issue of whether 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(13)(C)(v) could be applied retroactively. 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(13)(C)(v) overturned prior law which prevented Lawful Permanent Residents from being denied re-entry into the United States after brief casual trips abroad.

I listened to the arguments 3 times during my trip from CA to pro-2A (shall issue) Oregon today (it sometimes takes me 3 hours to watch "60 Minutes"), and felt compelled to post this. I was most struck by this part:

JUSTICE KAGAN: Well, Mr. Bibas, how is it different then from a felon in possession statute, where you look at the past offense -
MR. BIBAS: Right.
JUSTICE KAGAN: -- and then you say, well, this man, because of that past offense, can't buy a gun in the future? How is it different at all?

And then later:

MR. BIBAS:... I'd also point out that the felon in possession statute, as this Court noted in Heller, is part of a long tradition of forbidding such activity as a crime. So, it's hard to say there are settled expectations being upset by felon in possession laws.

Can anyone say "unintended consequences"?

Oral argument audio (http://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2011/2011_10_1211) in Vartelas v. Holder and transcripts (http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/10-1211.pdf).

I can't help but to wonder what effects this case could have on Enos v. Holder.

Could this case have effects to where the felon in possession statute could be in serious jeopardy, and even if not, could Enos be even more of a win for the future because of this case?

I didn't see the briefs for this case, but figured I'd put this here for everyone to look at it and comment on their thoughts.

Is this a good case to watch for the purpose of watching Enos?


04-19-2015, 11:56 PM
I know this is a few years old. Did any of the 2nd amendment lawyers see this thread?

04-20-2015, 10:40 AM

Reversed and remanded. 2nd Circuit.