BIA says I‑213 can carry weight
The BIA’s Matter of Mercado‑Martinez was summarized this week as affirming that an ICE Form I‑213 can satisfy the clear‑and‑convincing evidence standard in removal proceedings. That ruling tightens how practitioners must challenge ICE records in deportation cases. (x.com)
The Board issued Matter of MERCADO‑MARTINEZ on March 26, 2026, reversing an Immigration Judge’s July 29, 2025 order that had granted termination of removal proceedings. (justice.gov) The BIA sustained the Department of Homeland Security’s appeal, vacated the IJ’s termination order, and remanded the record to the immigration court. (justice.gov) The published opinion lists Appellate Immigration Judges Gemoets and Volkert and Temporary Appellate Immigration Judge McCloskey on the panel and identifies counsel Jose L. Chaidez for the respondent and Michael T. Schmitz for DHS. (justice.gov) The Board directed that if an IJ finds a Form I‑213 unreliable and insufficient to establish alienage, the IJ must identify specific evidence in the record that rebuts the I‑213’s presumption of reliability. (justice.gov) The opinion states DHS bears the burden to prove alienage by clear and convincing evidence under 8 C.F.R. § 1240.8(c), reviews that question de novo, and cites Mondac‑Vega v. Lynch while noting the First Circuit’s differing language in Rosa v. Bondi. (justice.gov) AILA posted a practitioner summary on March 27, 2026 (AILA Doc. No. 26032709) describing the BIA holding that IJs must articulate what evidence rebuts an I‑213 rather than simply rejecting the form. (aila.org) The Immigrant Legal Resource Center’s December 2023 practice advisory and I‑213 response checklist remain directly applicable for framing specific evidentiary objections and compiling rebuttal documents on the record after the BIA’s remand. (ilrc.org)
