Nken v. Holder
2009 United States Supreme Court case
Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418 (2009), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that immigrants who are contesting their impending deportation may request stays using the ordinary standards, but they cannot claim that they will be irreparably injured by wrongful deportation.
Background
Jean Marc Nken sought an order from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals staying his removal to Cameroon while his petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings was pending. Nken acknowledged that Circuit precedent required a noncitizen seeking such a stay to satisfy 8 U.S.C. §1252(f)(2), which sharply restricts the availability of injunctions blocking the removal of a noncitizen from this country, but he argued that a court's authority to stay a removal order should instead be controlled by the traditional criteria governing stays. The Court of Appeals denied the stay motion without comment.
Opinion of the court
The Supreme Court issued an opinion on April 22, 2009.
Later developments
In 2012, the federal government sent a letter to the Supreme Court to admit that their briefing on this case was inaccurate and portrayed a too-rosy impression of how reliably the government was ensuring people wrongfully removed were returned. The government did not apologize for this error but said that it regretted the necessity of the disclosure and promised to do better in the future.
References
External links
Text of Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418 (2009) is available from: Internet Archive (docket files) Justia
This article incorporates written opinion of a United States federal court.
The public source identifies “Nken v. Holder” as 2009 United States Supreme Court case. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Nken, Holder and United.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Nken v. Holder”, the useful work is to connect “2009 United States Supreme Court case” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated May 1, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q136499537. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2009, 1252 and 2012.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Nken v. Holder”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Nken v. Holder primary sources, Nken v. Holder archive and Nken research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Nken v. Holder”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Nken v. Holder” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.