{"id":5009,"date":"2024-08-07T12:34:19","date_gmt":"2024-08-07T12:34:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/?p=5009"},"modified":"2024-08-07T12:34:44","modified_gmt":"2024-08-07T12:34:44","slug":"vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/fr\/2024\/08\/07\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\/","title":{"rendered":"Vartelas c. Holder, 566 US 257 (2012)\u00a0: une d\u00e9cision historique sur la loi r\u00e9troactive sur l\u2019immigration"},"content":{"rendered":"

Vartelas c. Holder, 566 US 257 (2012)\u00a0: une d\u00e9cision historique sur la loi r\u00e9troactive sur l\u2019immigration<\/strong><\/p>\n

Dans les annales du droit de l\u2019immigration aux \u00c9tats-Unis, le cas de Vartelas c. Holder, 566 US 257 (2012)<\/strong> Cette d\u00e9cision est cruciale en mati\u00e8re d'application r\u00e9troactive des lois sur l'immigration. L'affaire concernait Panagis Vartelas, un r\u00e9sident permanent l\u00e9gal des \u00c9tats-Unis, qui a subi les cons\u00e9quences d\u00e9sastreuses d'une loi promulgu\u00e9e apr\u00e8s sa condamnation. L'arr\u00eat de la Cour supr\u00eame dans l'affaire Vartelas c. Holder a eu des r\u00e9percussions importantes sur les immigrants et leurs droits face aux modifications de la l\u00e9gislation sur l'immigration.<\/p>\n

Contexte de l'affaire<\/strong><\/p>\n

Panagis Vartelas, originaire de Gr\u00e8ce, est devenu r\u00e9sident permanent l\u00e9gal des \u00c9tats-Unis en 1989. En 1994, il a \u00e9t\u00e9 reconnu coupable d'un crime pour sa participation \u00e0 une op\u00e9ration de contrefa\u00e7on. Cette condamnation n'a toutefois pas imm\u00e9diatement remis en cause son statut de r\u00e9sident au regard des lois en vigueur \u00e0 l'\u00e9poque. Vartelas a continu\u00e9 \u00e0 vivre et \u00e0 travailler aux \u00c9tats-Unis et a effectu\u00e9 des voyages occasionnels \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger pour rendre visite \u00e0 ses parents malades en Gr\u00e8ce.<\/p>\n

Le changement juridique : IIRIRA<\/strong><\/p>\n

En 1996, le Congr\u00e8s a adopt\u00e9 la loi sur la r\u00e9forme de l'immigration ill\u00e9gale et la responsabilit\u00e9 des immigrants (IIRIRA), modifiant fondamentalement le droit de l'immigration. L'un des changements majeurs introduits par cette loi a \u00e9t\u00e9 l'imposition de restrictions strictes \u00e0 la r\u00e9admission des r\u00e9sidents permanents l\u00e9gaux ayant commis certains d\u00e9lits. Plus pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment, la nouvelle loi stipulait que les r\u00e9sidents permanents l\u00e9gaux reconnus coupables de certaines infractions seraient d\u00e9clar\u00e9s inadmissibles \u00e0 leur retour aux \u00c9tats-Unis apr\u00e8s un voyage \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger.<\/p>\n

Le dilemme de Vartelas<\/strong><\/p>\n

En 2003, Vartelas s'est rendu en Gr\u00e8ce pour rendre visite \u00e0 ses parents. \u00c0 son retour aux \u00c9tats-Unis, il a \u00e9t\u00e9 intercept\u00e9 par les services d'immigration et soumis aux dispositions de l'IIRIRA de 1996. Le gouvernement a cherch\u00e9 \u00e0 l'emp\u00eacher de rentrer sur le territoire en invoquant sa condamnation de 1994, arguant qu'en vertu de la nouvelle loi, Vartelas \u00e9tait inadmissible.<\/p>\n

Proc\u00e9dures judiciaires<\/strong><\/p>\n

Vartelas a contest\u00e9 la d\u00e9cision du gouvernement, arguant que l'application des dispositions de l'IIRIRA de 1996 \u00e0 sa condamnation ant\u00e9rieure \u00e0 la promulgation de la loi \u00e9tait inadmissiblement r\u00e9troactive. La Commission des recours en mati\u00e8re d'immigration (BIA) et la Cour d'appel du deuxi\u00e8me circuit ont rejet\u00e9 son argument, estimant que la nouvelle loi s'appliquait \u00e0 son cas. Confront\u00e9 \u00e0 une expulsion et \u00e0 la s\u00e9paration d'avec sa famille, Vartelas a interjet\u00e9 appel devant la Cour supr\u00eame.<\/p>\n

La d\u00e9cision de la Cour supr\u00eame<\/strong><\/p>\n

Dans une d\u00e9cision historique, la Cour supr\u00eame a donn\u00e9 raison \u00e0 Vartelas, jugeant inconstitutionnelle l'application r\u00e9troactive des dispositions de l'IIRIRA de 1996 \u00e0 sa condamnation ant\u00e9rieure \u00e0 la promulgation de la loi. La juge Ruth Bader Ginsburg, s'exprimant au nom de la majorit\u00e9, a soulign\u00e9 le principe de non-r\u00e9troactivit\u00e9 en droit am\u00e9ricain.<\/p>\n

Points cl\u00e9s de la d\u00e9cision<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Pr\u00e9somption contre la r\u00e9troactivit\u00e9<\/strong>La Cour a r\u00e9affirm\u00e9 la pr\u00e9somption de longue date contre la r\u00e9troactivit\u00e9 en droit f\u00e9d\u00e9ral. Les juges ont statu\u00e9 que les lois affectant des droits substantiels ou imposant de nouvelles charges ne devraient pas s'appliquer r\u00e9troactivement, sauf d\u00e9cision contraire expresse du Congr\u00e8s.<\/li>\n
  2. Int\u00e9r\u00eats de Reliance<\/strong>La Cour a reconnu que Vartelas, comme de nombreux autres r\u00e9sidents permanents l\u00e9gaux, avait pris des d\u00e9cisions de vie importantes fond\u00e9es sur le cadre juridique ant\u00e9rieur \u00e0 l'IIRIRA. Appliquer r\u00e9troactivement la nouvelle loi perturberait ces int\u00e9r\u00eats de confiance et imposerait de nouvelles contraintes impr\u00e9vues.<\/li>\n
  3. Impact sur la libert\u00e9<\/strong>:La Cour a not\u00e9 que l'application r\u00e9troactive de la disposition IIRIRA aurait de graves r\u00e9percussions sur la libert\u00e9 de Vartelas en limitant effectivement sa capacit\u00e9 \u00e0 voyager \u00e0 l'\u00e9tranger, un aspect important de la libert\u00e9 personnelle.<\/li>\n
  4. Interpr\u00e9tation des lois<\/strong>La Cour n'a trouv\u00e9 aucune indication claire que le Congr\u00e8s souhaitait que les nouvelles r\u00e8gles d'irrecevabilit\u00e9 s'appliquent r\u00e9troactivement aux condamnations ant\u00e9rieures \u00e0 la promulgation de la loi. En l'absence d'une telle intention explicite, la pr\u00e9somption de non-r\u00e9troactivit\u00e9 a pr\u00e9valu.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Implications pour les cas futurs<\/strong><\/p>\n

    La d\u00e9cision dans Vartelas c. Holder<\/strong> Cette d\u00e9cision a des implications profondes pour le droit de l'immigration et au-del\u00e0. Elle souligne l'importance de prot\u00e9ger le recours des individus aux lois existantes et d'\u00e9viter l'application r\u00e9troactive de nouvelles normes juridiques. Pour les immigrants, cette d\u00e9cision offre une protection essentielle contre les changements l\u00e9gislatifs soudains qui pourraient perturber leur vie et celle de leur famille.<\/p>\n

    Protection des int\u00e9r\u00eats de Reliance<\/strong><\/p>\n

    L'accent mis par la Cour sur les int\u00e9r\u00eats de confiance souligne la n\u00e9cessit\u00e9 de stabilit\u00e9 et de pr\u00e9visibilit\u00e9 du syst\u00e8me juridique. Les immigrants et leurs familles prennent des d\u00e9cisions importantes en se fondant sur les lois existantes, et des changements brutaux peuvent avoir des cons\u00e9quences d\u00e9vastatrices. L'arr\u00eat Vartelas renforce le principe selon lequel les lois ne doivent pas \u00eatre appliqu\u00e9es r\u00e9troactivement, sauf indication contraire du Congr\u00e8s.<\/p>\n

    Guide pour la r\u00e9daction des lois<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Cette d\u00e9cision sert \u00e9galement de guide aux l\u00e9gislateurs pour la r\u00e9daction de nouvelles lois. Lorsqu'il envisage d'imposer des effets r\u00e9troactifs, le Congr\u00e8s doit clairement exprimer son intention. Les ambigu\u00eft\u00e9s de la loi seront lev\u00e9es afin de prot\u00e9ger le recours des individus au cadre juridique pr\u00e9existant.<\/p>\n

    Impact juridique plus large<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Au-del\u00e0 du droit de l'immigration, l'arr\u00eat Vartelas a des implications dans divers domaines du droit o\u00f9 la r\u00e9troactivit\u00e9 pourrait entrer en jeu. Il renforce le r\u00f4le du pouvoir judiciaire dans la protection des droits des individus contre les mesures l\u00e9gislatives r\u00e9troactives, garantissant ainsi l'\u00e9quit\u00e9 et la justice dans l'application de la loi.<\/p>\n

    Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Le cas de Vartelas c. Holder<\/strong> L'affaire Vartelas c. Holder constitue un tournant dans l'interpr\u00e9tation de l'application r\u00e9troactive des lois aux \u00c9tats-Unis. La d\u00e9cision de la Cour supr\u00eame de prot\u00e9ger Panagis Vartelas de l'application r\u00e9troactive des dispositions de l'IIRIRA de 1996 souligne l'importance de pr\u00e9server les droits de d\u00e9pendance et les libert\u00e9s individuelles. Pour les immigrants et autres personnes concern\u00e9es par les modifications l\u00e9gislatives, l'affaire Vartelas c. Holder repr\u00e9sente un symbole d'espoir et de justice, garantissant que de nouvelles charges juridiques ne soient pas impos\u00e9es r\u00e9troactivement sans intention l\u00e9gislative claire et explicite.<\/p>\n

     <\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Vartelas v. Holder, 566 U.S. 257 (2012): A Landmark Decision on Retroactive Immigration Law In the annals of U.S. immigration law, the case of Vartelas v. Holder, 566 U.S. 257 (2012) stands out as a crucial decision regarding the retroactive application of immigration statutes. This case involved Panagis Vartelas, a lawful permanent resident of the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":138432333,"featured_media":5011,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"{title}\n\n{excerpt}\n\n{url}","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"_wpas_customize_per_network":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1920],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5009","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news"],"yoast_head":"\nVartelas v. Holder, 566 U.S. 257 (2012): A Landmark Decision on Retroactive Immigration Law - US Immigration Lawyer | Montreal & Ottawa<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/fr\/2024\/08\/07\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Vartelas v. Holder, 566 U.S. 257 (2012): A Landmark Decision on Retroactive Immigration Law - US Immigration Lawyer | Montreal & Ottawa\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"Vartelas v. Holder, 566 U.S. 257 (2012): A Landmark Decision on Retroactive Immigration Law In the annals of U.S. immigration law, the case of Vartelas v. Holder, 566 U.S. 257 (2012) stands out as a crucial decision regarding the retroactive application of immigration statutes. This case involved Panagis Vartelas, a lawful permanent resident of the […]\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/silverimmigration.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/tingey-injury-law-firm-DZpc4UY8ZtY-unsplash-1.jpg?fit=640%2C427&ssl=1\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@SilverImm\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@SilverImm\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"\u00c9crit par\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"matthewsilverimm\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Estimation du temps de lecture\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/2024\\\/08\\\/07\\\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/2024\\\/08\\\/07\\\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"matthewsilverimm\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/7e375deb147d33e19db89b39d0585f4d\"},\"headline\":\"Vartelas v. Holder, 566 U.S. 257 (2012): A Landmark Decision on Retroactive Immigration Law\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-08-07T12:34:19+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-08-07T12:34:44+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/2024\\\/08\\\/07\\\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":851,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/2024\\\/08\\\/07\\\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/08\\\/tingey-injury-law-firm-DZpc4UY8ZtY-unsplash-1.jpg?fit=640%2C427&ssl=1\",\"articleSection\":[\"News\"],\"inLanguage\":\"fr-CA\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/2024\\\/08\\\/07\\\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/2024\\\/08\\\/07\\\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\\\/\",\"name\":\"Vartelas v. Holder, 566 U.S. 257 (2012): A Landmark Decision on Retroactive Immigration Law - US Immigration Lawyer | Montreal & Ottawa\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/en\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/2024\\\/08\\\/07\\\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/2024\\\/08\\\/07\\\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/08\\\/tingey-injury-law-firm-DZpc4UY8ZtY-unsplash-1.jpg?fit=640%2C427&ssl=1\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-08-07T12:34:19+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-08-07T12:34:44+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/7e375deb147d33e19db89b39d0585f4d\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/2024\\\/08\\\/07\\\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"fr-CA\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/2024\\\/08\\\/07\\\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"fr-CA\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/2024\\\/08\\\/07\\\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/08\\\/tingey-injury-law-firm-DZpc4UY8ZtY-unsplash-1.jpg?fit=640%2C427&ssl=1\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/08\\\/tingey-injury-law-firm-DZpc4UY8ZtY-unsplash-1.jpg?fit=640%2C427&ssl=1\",\"width\":640,\"height\":427},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/2024\\\/08\\\/07\\\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Vartelas v. Holder, 566 U.S. 257 (2012): A Landmark Decision on Retroactive Immigration Law\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/en\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/en\\\/\",\"name\":\"US Immigration Lawyer | Montreal & Ottawa\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/en\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"fr-CA\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/7e375deb147d33e19db89b39d0585f4d\",\"name\":\"matthewsilverimm\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"fr-CA\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/145872a09b6073f17be811fcda17a6fa3499e09a5a6af8ddc5bbc3dc5e7262e0?s=96&d=identicon&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/145872a09b6073f17be811fcda17a6fa3499e09a5a6af8ddc5bbc3dc5e7262e0?s=96&d=identicon&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/145872a09b6073f17be811fcda17a6fa3499e09a5a6af8ddc5bbc3dc5e7262e0?s=96&d=identicon&r=g\",\"caption\":\"matthewsilverimm\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/silverimmigration.com\\\/fr\\\/author\\\/matthewsilverimm\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Vartelas c. Holder, 566 US 257 (2012)\u00a0: Une d\u00e9cision historique sur le droit de l'immigration r\u00e9troactif - Avocat sp\u00e9cialis\u00e9 en immigration aux \u00c9tats-Unis | Montr\u00e9al et Ottawa","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/fr\/2024\/08\/07\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\/","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Vartelas v. Holder, 566 U.S. 257 (2012): A Landmark Decision on Retroactive Immigration Law - US Immigration Lawyer | Montreal & Ottawa","twitter_description":"Vartelas v. Holder, 566 U.S. 257 (2012): A Landmark Decision on Retroactive Immigration Law In the annals of U.S. immigration law, the case of Vartelas v. Holder, 566 U.S. 257 (2012) stands out as a crucial decision regarding the retroactive application of immigration statutes. This case involved Panagis Vartelas, a lawful permanent resident of the […]","twitter_image":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/silverimmigration.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/tingey-injury-law-firm-DZpc4UY8ZtY-unsplash-1.jpg?fit=640%2C427&ssl=1","twitter_creator":"@SilverImm","twitter_site":"@SilverImm","twitter_misc":{"\u00c9crit par":"matthewsilverimm","Estimation du temps de lecture":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/2024\/08\/07\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/2024\/08\/07\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\/"},"author":{"name":"matthewsilverimm","@id":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/7e375deb147d33e19db89b39d0585f4d"},"headline":"Vartelas v. Holder, 566 U.S. 257 (2012): A Landmark Decision on Retroactive Immigration Law","datePublished":"2024-08-07T12:34:19+00:00","dateModified":"2024-08-07T12:34:44+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/2024\/08\/07\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\/"},"wordCount":851,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/2024\/08\/07\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/silverimmigration.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/tingey-injury-law-firm-DZpc4UY8ZtY-unsplash-1.jpg?fit=640%2C427&ssl=1","articleSection":["News"],"inLanguage":"fr-CA"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/2024\/08\/07\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\/","url":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/2024\/08\/07\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\/","name":"Vartelas c. Holder, 566 US 257 (2012)\u00a0: Une d\u00e9cision historique sur le droit de l'immigration r\u00e9troactif - Avocat sp\u00e9cialis\u00e9 en immigration aux \u00c9tats-Unis | Montr\u00e9al et Ottawa","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/en\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/2024\/08\/07\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/2024\/08\/07\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/silverimmigration.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/tingey-injury-law-firm-DZpc4UY8ZtY-unsplash-1.jpg?fit=640%2C427&ssl=1","datePublished":"2024-08-07T12:34:19+00:00","dateModified":"2024-08-07T12:34:44+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/7e375deb147d33e19db89b39d0585f4d"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/2024\/08\/07\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"fr-CA","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/2024\/08\/07\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"fr-CA","@id":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/2024\/08\/07\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/silverimmigration.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/tingey-injury-law-firm-DZpc4UY8ZtY-unsplash-1.jpg?fit=640%2C427&ssl=1","contentUrl":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/silverimmigration.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/tingey-injury-law-firm-DZpc4UY8ZtY-unsplash-1.jpg?fit=640%2C427&ssl=1","width":640,"height":427},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/2024\/08\/07\/vartelas-v-holder-566-u-s-257-2012-a-landmark-decision-on-retroactive-immigration-law\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Vartelas v. Holder, 566 U.S. 257 (2012): A Landmark Decision on Retroactive Immigration Law"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/en\/","name":"Avocat en immigration aux \u00c9tats-Unis | Montr\u00e9al et Ottawa","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"fr-CA"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/7e375deb147d33e19db89b39d0585f4d","name":"matthewsilverimm","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"fr-CA","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/145872a09b6073f17be811fcda17a6fa3499e09a5a6af8ddc5bbc3dc5e7262e0?s=96&d=identicon&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/145872a09b6073f17be811fcda17a6fa3499e09a5a6af8ddc5bbc3dc5e7262e0?s=96&d=identicon&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/145872a09b6073f17be811fcda17a6fa3499e09a5a6af8ddc5bbc3dc5e7262e0?s=96&d=identicon&r=g","caption":"matthewsilverimm"},"url":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/fr\/author\/matthewsilverimm\/"}]}},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/silverimmigration.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/tingey-injury-law-firm-DZpc4UY8ZtY-unsplash-1.jpg?fit=640%2C427&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":false,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paTZWy-1iN","amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5009","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/138432333"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5009"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5009\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5012,"href":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5009\/revisions\/5012"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5011"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5009"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5009"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/silverimmigration.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5009"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}