Free Newsletter
Immigration: Removal-Exceptional Hardship-Motion to Reopen and Remand
Staff Report//June 17, 2026//
Petitioner sought review of the BIA’s order denying his motion to reopen and remand removal proceedings. Petitioner unsuccessfully sought cancellation of removal based on alleged exceptional hardship to qualifying relatives. After petitioner got married, he moved to reopen and remand proceedings based on new facts. The BIA concluded that the evidence was insufficient to prove that his wife and children would suffer an exceptional hardship from his removal.
Where the evidence showed that any hardship petitioner’s family would experience would not be beyond that normally experienced by family members following deportation, there was no error in denying the motion.
Petition is denied.
Ramirez Cruz v. Blanche (MLW No. 84925/Case No. 25-1062 – 5 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Legal Tech
- New dedicated coverage of tech challenges facing law firms and legal departments
- Gemini Legal launches DraftEngine for civil litigation forms
- Lawyers continue to grapple with AI ethical issues
Latest Opinion Digests
- Insurance-Interpleader-Competing Claims to Insurance Proceeds
- Employer-Employee-Discrimination-Hostile Work Environment
- Criminal Law-Rape-Oral and Written Judgments
- Torts-Defamation-Official Immunity
- Real Property-Adverse Possession-Oral Agreement for Sale
- Domestic Relations-Termination of Parental Rights-Parental Unfitness
- Criminal Law-Violation of Order of Protection-Scope of Cross-Examination
Top stories
- 8th Circuit affirms denial of preliminary injunction against SB 751
- New dedicated coverage of tech challenges facing law firms and legal departments
- Parity Act claim against insurer for child’s treatment survives motion to dismiss
- ABA opinion addresses client restrictions in engagement letters
- U.S. District Court allows plaintiffs to amend complaint alleging fraud
- AAA Insurance faces $21.5M bad faith verdict in Clay County
- Legal Limelight: Meghan S. Largent champions landowners in takings cases
- Supreme Court rejects bright-line rule on FAA worker exemption
