Santos-Zacaria v. Garland

Leon Santos-Zacaria, a transgender woman from El Salvador, feared persecution based on her gender identity and sought relief from removal. After an immigration judge denied her request and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissed her appeal, she petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. The 5th Circuit dismissed her petition for lack of jurisdiction, ruling she failed to exhaust administrative remedies because she did not file a motion to reconsider with the BIA. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to determine whether the exhaustion requirement under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1) is a jurisdictional rule or a claim-processing rule.

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously reversed the 5th Circuit. Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored the opinion, holding that the exhaustion requirement in § 1252(d)(1) is a non-jurisdictional claim-processing rule. The case was remanded for further proceedings, allowing Santos-Zacaria’s petition for review to proceed.

Whether the requirement that a noncitizen exhaust administrative remedies under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1) is a jurisdictional prerequisite (which courts must strictly enforce) or a non-jurisdictional claim-processing rule (which can be waived or forfeited).

The decision preserved access to federal judicial review for noncitizens facing removal, particularly vulnerable LGBTQ+ asylum seekers. It clarified a crucial distinction between jurisdictional requirements and claim-processing rules in federal administrative law, preventing courts from reflexively dismissing cases for minor procedural omissions.