WASHINGTON — Carlos Martinez Gutierrez got caught smuggling three Mexican children into California. Now, his travails have reached the Supreme Court.
On Tuesday, the court agreed to hear Gutierrez’s case and others that raise questions potentially crucial for other children of illegal immigrants. If Gutierrez wins, some immigrants may find it easier to avoid removal and stay in the United States.
“The case is significant,” Gutierrez’s appellate attorney, Stephen Kinnaird, said Tuesday, adding that “you can have possible breakups of families” in certain circumstances.
Advocacy groups already are lining up on two other cases to be heard by the Supreme Court during the October term, which begins Monday. The other cases, involving a Los Angeles resident convicted of voluntary manslaughter and a Southern California couple convicted of filing a false tax return, center on the crimes that make immigrants subject to deportation.
When the Department of Homeland Security wanted to kick Gutierrez out of the United States, he sought protection under a law that turns on how long someone has been in this country. The law permits a judge to cancel removal proceedings and let an immigrant stay in the United States if, among other conditions, the immigrant has been “lawfully admitted for permanent residence for not less than five years.”
Gutierrez’s family entered the United States illegally in 1988 or 1989, when he was 5. In 1991, his father attained legal U.S. residence status. Gutierrez attended high school near San Jose, Calif.
In October 2003, Gutierrez attained legal U.S. residency at age 19. Two years after that, with his father disabled and his mother unemployed, he agreed to smuggle several minors into the United States in exchange for $1,500.
Nonetheless, a judge ruled Gutierrez can stay in this country, in part because he met the legal residency requirement.
“The parent’s admission for permanent residence (in 1991) was also imputed to the parent’s minor children,” immigration Judge Zsa Zsa C. DePaolo reasoned.
The Obama administration says the clock for Gutierrez started ticking in 2003.
The consequences will be particularly felt in California, Washington, Idaho and other Western states covered by the 9th Circuit, where U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli Jr. noted that nearly half of all “cancellation of removal” applications arise.
