Children's Legal Rights Journal - Spring 2013

Uneven Access to Special Immigration Juvenile Status
This formulation deals, albeit indirectly, with the state’s concern of
the superfluity of the term “or both.”
Having found the language susceptible to more than one
reasonable interpretation, the court deemed it ambiguous and turned
to sources outside the statute to interpret it. 58 Focusing first on
legislative history, the court noted the progression of SIJS language
over time. 59 The court pointed out that originally SIJS findings
consisted only of “a judicial or administrative order determining . . .
that the juvenile alien was dependent on a juvenile court and that it
would not be in the juvenile’s best interest to be returned to the
juvenile’s or parent’s home country.” 60 The court then noted that in a
1997 amendment, Congress restricted SIJS eligibility, requiring a
court determination that the juvenile is “eligible for long-term foster
care due to abuse, neglect, or abandonment.” 61 The court found
legislative history indicating, “Congress intended that the [1997]
amendment would prevent youths from using this remedy for the
purpose of obtaining legal permanent resident status, rather than for
the purpose of obtaining relief from abuse or neglect.” 62 In
reformulation to explain that it finds the language ambiguous and open to outside
sources of interpretation. See id. at 644.

About this publication

fullscreen

article text for page

< previous story | next story >

Share this page with a friend
Save to “My Stuff”
Subscribe to this magazine
Search
Help