INS v. Bagamasbad

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE v.

移民与归化局诉

BAGAMASBAD

巴加马斯巴德

That section authorizes the Attorney General in his discretion to change the status of an alien who is physically present in the United States to that of a permanent resident, but only if,

该条授权司法部长在其裁量权范围内将实际身在美国的外侨身份变更为永久居民，但仅当

and Naturalization Service (INS) denied respondent's appli- cation as a matter of discretion because she had made serious misrepresentations to the United States consul who had

与归化局（INS）以裁量为由驳回被上诉人的申请，理由是她向为其

issued her visa. For the same reasons, the immigration judge presiding at a later deportation hearing also declined to exercise his discretion in her favor. Neither the District Director nor the immigration judge addressed himself to whether respondent satisfied the specific statutory require- ments for permanent residence. The Board of Immigration

签发签证的美国领事作出了严重虚假陈述。 基于同样理由，主持其后驱逐出境听证的移民法官也拒绝行使其裁量权作出有利于她的裁定。地区主任和移民法官均未处理被上诉人是否满足永久居留的具体法定要求这一问题。移民上诉

Appeals affirmed, finding that the circumstances fully sup- ported the discretionary denial of relief and concluding that "the immigration judge could properly pretermit the question of statutory eligibility and deny the application . . . as an exercise of discretion."

委员会维持原裁定，认定相关情形完全支持以裁量为由拒绝给予救济，并结论认为“移民法官可以适当地搁置法定资格问题，并作为裁量权的行使驳回该申请……”

A divided Court of Appeals sitting en banc held that al- though the immigration judge had properly exercised his discretion to deny respondent's application, the statute re- quired the judge to make findings and reach conclusions with respect to respondent's eligibility for admission into this country as a permanent resident. 531 F. 2d 111 (CA3 1976).

一个意见分歧的上诉法院全体庭审合议庭认为，尽管移民法官已适当行使裁量权驳回被申请人的申请，但法规要求该法官就被申请人作为永久居民入境本国的资格作出事实认定并得出结论。531 F. 2d 111 (CA3 1976)。

Disagreeing as we do with the Court of Appeals, we grant the petition for certiorari filed by the INS and the motion by respondent to proceed in forma pauperis and reverse the

我们不同意上诉法院的意见，故准许移民与归化局提出的调取案卷复审令申请以及被上诉人提出的以贫民身份进行诉讼的动议，并撤销

judgment of the Court of Appeals.

上诉法院的判决。

As a general rule courts and agencies are not required to make findings on issues the decision of which is unnecessary

作为一般规则，法院和行政机关无须对作出决定所不必需的问题

available to him at the time his application is approved." (Emphasis added.) If adjustment of status is denied, and the alien leaves the country, such alien is free to apply to a United States consul in the country to which he or she is deported for an immigrant visa. Title 8 U. S. C. § 1255 (a) was enacted so that such aliens would not inevitably be required to leave the country and apply to a United States consul in order to obtain

在其申请获批准时可立即获得的。” （着重号为原文所加。） 如身份调整被拒绝，且该外侨离境，则该外侨可自由向其被驱逐前往国家的美国领事申请移民签证。《美国法典》第8编第1255条(a)款之所以制定，是为了使此类外侨不必必然离境并向美国领事申请，以获得

permanent-resident status.

永久居民身份。

cert. denied, 377 U. S. 917 (1964); Goon Wing Wah v. INS, 386 F. 2d 292 (CA1 1967); De Lucia v. INS, 370 F. 2d 305, 308 (CA7 1966), cert. denied, 386 U. S. 912 (1967). Here, it is conceded that respondent's application would have been properly denied whether or not she satisfied the statutory eligibility requirements. In these circumstances, absent an express statutory requirement, we see no reason to depart from the general rule and require the immigration judge to

cert. denied, 377 U. S. 917 (1964)；Goon Wing Wah v. INS, 386 F. 2d 292 (CA1 1967)；De Lucia v. INS, 370 F. 2d 305, 308 (CA7 1966)，cert. denied, 386 U. S. 912 (1967)。在此，双方均承认，无论被申请人是否满足法定资格要求，其申请本应被适当驳回。在此情形下，在缺乏明确法定要求的情况下，我们认为没有理由偏离一般规则并要求移民法官

arrive at purely advisory findings and conclusions as to statutory eligibility.

就法定资格作出纯属咨询性的事实认定和结论。

In arriving at its contrary conclusion, the Court of Appeals relied on a dictum in Jay v. Boyd, 351 U. S. 345 (1956),

上诉法院在得出相反结论时，依据了Jay v. Boyd, 351 U. S. 345 (1956)一案中的附带意见，

which involved a similar provision, 8 U. S. C. § 1254 (a), authorizing the Attorney General in his discretion to grant relief from deportation if certain eligibility requirements are met. In the course of affirming the discretionary denial of relief, the Court indicated that the statute entitled the appli- cant to a ruling on his eligibility. But the statement fol- lowed a reference to immigration regulations which then expressly required a determination of eligibility in each case. 351 U. S., at 352-353. These regulations have been super- seded, and the regulation applicable to this case has no such requirement. 8 CFR § 242.18 (a) (1976).

该案涉及一项类似规定，即《美国法典》第8编第1254条(a)款，该款授权司法部长在其裁量权范围内，在满足某些资格要求时准予免于驱逐出境的救济。在维持以裁量为由拒绝给予救济的过程中，法院表示该法规赋予申请人就其资格获得裁定的权利。但该陈述是在提及当时明确要求对每一案件确定资格的移民规章之后作出的。351 U. S., at 352-353。这些规章已被取代，适用于本案的规章没有此种要求。《联邦规章汇编》第8编第242.18条(a)款（1976年）。

The Court of Appeals also thought it advisable to require the making of eligibility findings in 8 U. S. C. § 1255 (a) proceedings to foreclose the possibility that a United States

上诉法院还认为，宜要求在《美国法典》第8编第1255条(a)款程序中作出资格认定，以排除以下可能性：外侨此后可能向其申请移民签证的美国

consul to whom an alien might later apply for an immigra- tion visa would mistakenly construe the immigration judge's exercise of discretion as a finding of statutory ineligibility

领事，会错误地将移民法官行使裁量权解释为关于法定不合格的认定，且该认定

binding on the consul. But the basis for the immigration judge's action must be set forth in writing under 8 CFR § 242.18 (a) (1976). Where, as here, his action is discretion- ary, it will be clear to any United States consul that no eligi- bility determination has been made. The consul will be free to give such findings as have been made their appropriate

对领事具有约束力。但移民法官采取行动的依据必须根据《联邦规章汇编》第8编第242.18条(a)款（1976年）以书面形式载明。 在如本案这样其行动属裁量性质的情况下，任何美国领事都会清楚地知道并未作出资格认定。领事可以自由地对其已作出的事实认定给予适当的

weight, if any, see Cartier v. Secretary of State, 165 U. S. App. D. C. 130, 137, 506 F. 2d 191, 198 (1974), cert. denied, 421 U. S. 947 (1975) ; Talavera v. Pederson, 334 F. 2d 52, 57 (CA6

权重（如有），见Cartier v. Secretary of State, 165 U. S. App. D. C. 130, 137, 506 F. 2d 191, 198 (1974), cert. denied, 421 U. S. 947 (1975)；Talavera v. Pederson, 334 F. 2d 52, 57 (CA6

1964), and to make his own legal judgment on eligibility.

1964年），并就资格作出其自己的法律判断。

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed.

上诉法院的判决予以撤销。

So ordered.

特此裁定。