Dimaya v. Sessions – Sessions loses.
And the cherry on top? Justice Gorsuch cast the deciding vote and authored a compelling concurrence defending due process.
In this landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the definition of “crime of violence” in 18 U.S.C. § 16(b), as incorporated into the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), is unconstitutionally vague. This provision had been used to classify certain convictions as “aggravated felonies,” triggering automatic deportation and severely limiting access to immigration relief.
So, what does the decision mean?
A “crime of violence” aggravated felony determination may no longer be valid. If a person was ordered removed based on this category alone, their case may now be eligible for reopening.
Derivative categories are affected too. For example, INA § 237(a)(2)(E)(i) defines “crime of domestic violence” as requiring a “crime of violence.” Without a valid definition of that term, many removability findings may be invalid.
It’s unclear whether the decision applies retroactively, but the door is now open for litigation and motions to reopen based on this constitutional defect.
Justice Gorsuch’s concurrence emphasized the importance of the due process clause in immigration law, reinforcing that vague statutes that deprive individuals of liberty cannot stand—especially in the deportation context, where the stakes are life-altering.
What should practitioners do now?
If you have a client who was removed, or is facing removal, based on a conviction labeled a “crime of violence” under § 16(b), review the case immediately. Look for decisions that relied on the voided language—particularly those that did not involve the “elements clause” of § 16(a), which was not affected by the ruling.
This decision, while expected after Johnson v. United States (2015), represents a major shift in how immigration courts and the BIA must analyze criminal convictions. It also underscores the continuing erosion of categorical removability grounds that lack clarity and predictability.
Let me know if you’d like a follow-up post breaking down what types of cases are most likely to be impacted or how to file a motion to reopen based on Dimaya.