⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

Sintia Nivar Santana entered the United States from the Dominican Republic on a visitor visa, overstayed it, and later sought a green card through her U.S.-citizen son. Her application ran into a U.S.-citizen box checked on a 2013 employment form; she says she did not check it, and the evidence did not establish who did. An immigration judge held that this uncertainty meant she had not proved admissibility 'clearly and beyond doubt,' denied the application, and ordered her removed. The immigration appeals board agreed. After the Fourth Circuit denied her petition, the Supreme Court vacated that judgment and sent it back in light of Loper Bright, which ended the rule that courts defer to agencies on ambiguous statutes. On this rehearing, the question is whether that demanding proof standard applies to a person already admitted who seeks a green card during removal proceedings, or whether she needs only to show it is more likely than not that she is admissible.

Sintia Nivar Santana v. Todd Blanche (No. 22-2114) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, argued September 15, 2026.