PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _______________ No. 17-2159 _______________ WENDY AMPARO OSORIO-MARTINEZ Individually and on behalf of her minor child, D.S.R.-O., and all others similarly situated; CARMEN ALEYDA LOBO MEJIA, Individually and on behalf of her minor child, A.D.M.-L., and all other similarly situated; MARIA DELMI MARTINEZ NOLASCO, Individually, and on behalf of her minor child, J.E.L.-M., and all others similarly situated; JETHZABEL MARITZA AGUILAR MANCIA, Individually, and on behalf of her minor child, V.G.R.-A., and all others similarly situated, Appellants v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; SECRETARY UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; ACTING DIRECTOR UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES PHILADELPHIA DISTRICT OFFICE; FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION & CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT; DIRECTOR BERKS COUNTY RESIDENTIAL CENTER; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY _______________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (E.D. Pa. No. 5-17-cv-01747) Honorable Paul S. Diamond, U.S. District Judge _______________ Argued: September 19, 2017 Before: AMBRO, KRAUSE, and SCIRICA, Circuit Judges. (Opinion Filed: June 18, 2018) Bridget Cambria Jacquelyn M. Kline Cambria & Kline 532 Walnut Street Reading, PA 19601 Carol A. Donohoe P.O. Box 12912 Reading, PA 19612 Jessica Rickabaugh [ARGUED] Tucker Law Group 1801 Market Street Suite 2500 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Anthony C. Vale Pepper Hamilton LLP 3000 Two Logan Square 2 18th and Arch Streets Philadelphia, PA 19013 Counsel for Appellants Nancy Winkelman Bruce P. Merenstein Arleigh P. Helfer III Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis 1600 Market Street, Suite 3600 Philadelphia, Pa 19103 Counsel for Amicus Appellant Chad A. Readler Assistant Attorney General William C. Preachey Director Office of Immigration Litigation Erez Reuveni Senior Litigation Counsel Vinita Adrapalliyal Joseph A. Darrow [ARGUED] United States Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation P.O. Box 868 Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044 Counsel for Appellees _______________ OPINION OF THE COURT _______________ KRAUSE, Circuit Judge. 3 Petitioners, four children of Salvadoran and Honduran origin and their mothers, appear before us for a second time to challenge their expedited orders of removal. In Castro v. United States Department of Homeland Security, 835 F.3d 422 (3d Cir. 2016), cert. denied, 137 S. Ct. 1581 (2017), we held that we lacked jurisdiction to review their claims under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and that, while the Suspension Clause of the Constitution would allow an aggrieved party with sufficient ties to the United States to challenge that lack of jurisdiction, the petitioners’ ties were inadequate because their relationship to the United States amounted only to presence in the country for a few hours before their apprehension by immigration officers. Thus, we affirmed the District Court’s dismissal of their petition. Now, two years after their initial detention, Petitioners raise what, at first glance, appear to be the same claims. But upon inspection they differ in a critical respect: The children now have been accorded Special Immigrant Juvenile (SIJ) status—a protective classification designed by Congress to safeguard abused, abandoned, or neglected alien children ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals