INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 22 (1992)

Page:   Index   Previous  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  Next

Cite as: 502 U. S. 314 (1992)

Opinion of Scalia, J.

reapplication than the withdrawal of an application for Social Security benefits prevents later reapplication.

In addition to the mere fact of withdrawal, there was the following exchange between the IJ and counsel for Doherty:

"Q. . . . I just want to be sure . . . there won't be any application for political asylum and/or withholding of deportation, correct?

"A. That is correct. "Q. No application for voluntary departure? "A. That is correct. "Q. In other words, there is no application for relief from deportation that you will be making?

"A. That is correct." App. 32.

The IJ engaged in this questioning in order to determine whether he would accept the proposal of Doherty's counsel to concede deportability and designate a country, instead of proceeding with further proof of deportability. In that context, the only commitment reasonably expressed by the above-quoted exchange, it seems to me, was a commitment not to seek withholding if the proposed designation was allowed. Doherty thereby waived, I think, the right to seek withholding if the United Kingdom should be specified as the "alternate" destination and if Ireland, though accepted as his designated country of deportation, should refuse to accept him. This is confirmed by the following exchange between the IJ and Doherty's counsel later in the hearing, after the Government had requested specification of the United Kingdom as the "alternate" destination:

"Q. And, what about the other issue about the alternate designation? What if Eire doesn't accept him?

"A. Your Honor, we are assured that Ireland will accept him and that there is no basis under Irish law not to accept him.

335

Page:   Index   Previous  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  Next

Last modified: October 4, 2007