In a rare 5-4 decision, Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the court’s liberal wing in a ruling that could reshape how immigration deadlines are interpreted.
The case, Monsalvo Velazquez v. Bondi, centered on whether immigrants granted a 60-day “voluntary departure” period should get extra time if their deadline falls on a weekend or legal holiday. The court ruled yes — that the deadline should extend to the next business day.
Writing for the majority, Gorsuch argued that this interpretation aligns with long-standing administrative practice. “When Congress adopts a new law against the backdrop of a ‘long-standing administrative construction,’ the Court generally presumes the new provision works in harmony with what came before,” he wrote.
The ruling overturns both the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals and the Board of Immigration Appeals, which had previously ruled against extending deadlines for non-business days. It also marks a win for Monsalvo Velazquez, a 32-year-old Colorado man facing removal proceedings since 2019.
Gorsuch and Roberts joined Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson in the majority. Meanwhile, Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett dissented. Alito notably warned against letting “sympathy for petitioner” shape statutory interpretation, arguing that deadlines should be firm regardless of the day they fall on.
Though the case may seem technical, it carries broader implications. The ruling arrives just weeks before the Court is set to hear another high-stakes immigration case: former President Trump’s attempt to end birthright citizenship in the U.S.
With immigration set to be a defining legal battleground in the months ahead, this narrow — and surprising — decision signals that the Supreme Court may not vote strictly along ideological lines.