This week, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Chaidez v. United States, holding that the much-lauded 2010 case Padilla v. Kentucky cannot be applied retroactively. Padilla held that the failure of criminal defense attorneys to advise their noncitizen clients of the immigration consequences associated with taking a guilty plea violated their Constitutional rights. Therefore, it became possible for noncitizens facing deportation to overturn their convictions or any resulting removal order.
A common issue in comprehensive immigration reform debates is how to fairly provide status those who are here illegaly without "jumping the line" ahead of those who have been waiting for residency outside the U.S., often for many years. Many reform proposals call for a temporary status for those who are here illegally, but a requirement they not become residents ahead of those already in the system. Others argue any sort of status for those here illegally unfairly prejudices those who have been waiting abraod.