Singh

Singh v. Waters

Good Law
87 F.3d 346·96 Daily Journal DAR 7408·1996 WL 343644·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 15131·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4592
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 24, 1996No. 95-15943California2,355 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Noonan, J.

Parminder Singh appeals the denial by the district court of his petition for habeas corpus. The case involves two points of prime importance in the congressional scheme for the fair treatment of aliens within our borders. Congress has created immigration judges, who, although they do not have the security of life tenure, are intended to act as judges — that is, as persons fearlessly and impartially applying the laws of the United *347 States to the agency to which they are assigned; and whose orders are to be obeyed by such agency as the orders of other judges of the United States are to be obeyed. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (b). Further, Congress has created a statutory right to counsel for aliens faced with the complicated labyrinths of an immigration hearing. See id. This right to counsel, although not guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, is not to be lightly disregarded or effectively subverted by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (the INS or Service). See Castro-O’Ryan v. INS, 847 F.2d 1307, 1313 (9th Cir.1987). Holding that Singh was unlawfully deported by the Service from the United States and therefore remains under the restraint of an order of deportation, we hold that…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.