← All Authorities
United States uncategorised

Pugin v Garland

599 U.S. 600 (2023)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtUS Supreme Court
Year2023
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Under the categorical approach, Indiana robbery does not qualify as a 'theft offense' under the INA because it does not match the generic federal definition.

Key Principle

categorical approach; Indiana robbery not 'theft offense' under INA; generic federal definition applies

Area of Law

immigration

Related Cases

Minister for Immigration v NZYQ [2023] HCA 37

Executive detention of non-citizens is only lawful where removal is reasonably practicable; indefinite detention where removal is not possible is constitutionally invalid, effectively overruling Al-Kateb.

Minister for Immigration v Vunilagi [2023] HCA 24

HCA considered s 80 Constitution guarantee of trial by jury and the Kable principle as they apply to territory courts and territory criminal proceedings.

Alexander v Minister for Home Affairs (Character Cancellation) [2022] HCA 19

Ministerial discretion to cancel a visa on character grounds must be exercised according to statutory criteria and is subject to judicial review for legal error.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Pugin v Garland and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Pugin v Garland