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