Monsalvo Velazquez v. Garland
Case Overview
Monsalvo Velazquez, a noncitizen subject to removal, argued that a defective notice to appear omitting the hearing's time and date did not trigger the stop-time rule, allowing him to continue accruing the ten-year continuous presence required for cancellation of removal. The Supreme Court held, following Pereira v. Sessions and Niz-Chavez v. Garland, that a defective NTA missing the required time-and-date information does not trigger the stop-time rule, and continuous presence continues to accrue until proper notice is served.
The Facts
Velazquez received a notice to appear that omitted the time and date of his removal hearing, as was common government practice in the 2010s. The stop-time rule under 8 U.S.C. Section 1229b(d)(1) ends continuous presence accrual when the government serves a notice to appear. Velazquez argued a document missing required statutory elements is not a valid NTA and cannot trigger the stop-time rule, which would allow him to accumulate the ten years necessary to apply for cancellation of removal.
The Application
Applying Pereira and Niz-Chavez, the Court held that Velazquez's notice to appear - which omitted the statutory time and date of the removal hearing - failed to comply with Section 1229(a)'s requirements and therefore did not trigger the stop-time rule. Because the NTA lacked these essential statutory elements, Velazquez's continuous presence did not cease upon service; it continued to accrue toward the ten-year threshold for cancellation of removal eligibility. The Court confirmed that only a complete and compliant NTA containing all statutorily mandated information can cut off presence accrual, resolving the circuit split by rejecting the government's argument that any initiating document - regardless of defects - would suffice.
The Conclusion
**Monsalvo Velazquez confirms that a notice to appear missing the statutory time-and-date requirement does not trigger the stop-time rule, allowing continuous presence to continue accruing.** For noncitizens who received defective NTAs during the period when omitting hearing dates was standard government practice, the ruling may allow many to establish ten-year continuous presence and apply for cancellation of removal, significantly affecting a large cohort of long-term residents in removal proceedings.
No circuit court data for this case.
Flag an issue
This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support