IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES NIDAL KHALID NASRALLAH, ) Petitioner, ) v. ) No. 18-1432 WILLIAM P. BARR, ATTORNEY GENERAL, )

HERITAGE REPORTING CORPORATION
Official Reporters
1220 L Street, N.W., Suite 206
Washington, D.C. 20005
(202) 628-4888
www.hrccourtreporters.com

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25



Official – Subject to Final Review
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
NIDAL KHALID NASRALLAH, )
Petitioner, )
v. ) No. 18-1432
WILLIAM P. BARR, ATTORNEY GENERAL, )
Respondent. )
Washington, D.C.
Monday, March 2, 2020
The above-entitled matter came on
for oral argument before the Supreme Court of the
United States at 10:05 a.m.
APPEARANCES:
PAUL HUGHES, ESQ., Washington, D.C.;
on behalf of the Petitioner.
MATTHEW GUARNIERI, Assistant to the Solicitor General,
Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.;
on behalf of the Respondent.
Heritage Reporting Corporation

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2
Official – Subject to Final Review
C O N T E N T S
ORAL ARGUMENT OF: PAGE:
PAUL HUGHES, ESQ.
On behalf of the Petitioner 3
ORAL ARGUMENT OF:
MATTHEW GUARNIERI, ESQ.
On behalf of the Respondent 30
REBUTTAL ARGUMENT OF:
PAUL HUGHES, ESQ.
On behalf of the Petitioner 64
Heritage Reporting Corporation

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
3
Official – Subject to Final Review
P R O C E E D I N G S
(10:05 a.m.)
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: We’ll hear
argument first this morning in Case 18-1432,
Nasrallah versus Barr.
Mr. Hughes.
ORAL ARGUMENT OF PAUL HUGHES
ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER
MR. HUGHES: Mr. Chief Justice, and
may it please the Court:
When Congress enacted the
jurisdiction-stripping provision in (2)(C), it
expressly defined the key term “order of
removal.” It is an order that finds an
individual deportable or orders deportation.
A CAT order does neither, and the
government does not disagree. CAT relief is
temporary, applicable only to the country where
an individual is likely to be tortured or
killed. If CAT relief is granted, the removal
order remains enforceable. As the government
says, “a grant of withholding or deferral leaves
the final order of removal undisturbed.”
When Congress enacted (2)(C), it also
stripped jurisdiction of expedited removal
Heritage Reporting Corporation

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
4
Official – Subject to Final Review
orders. This is Section (2)(A), reprinted in
the government’s brief at page 4a. It bars
judicial review of “any individual determination
or any other cause or claim arising from or
relating to the implementation or operation” of
an expedited order of removal. That br


Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather