Ramsay v. Bondi

── Ramsay v. Bondi ── Case No.: 23-8121 Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Date: March 27, 2026 Category: General 23-8121-ag Ramsay v. Bondi United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit August Term, 2025 (Argued: December 15, 2025 Decided: March 27, 2026) Docket No. 23-8121-ag _____________________________________ JOHN MARCUS RAMSAY, Petitioner, v. PAMELA BONDI, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. * _____________________________________ Before: CABRANES, PARKER, and LOHIER, Circuit Judges. Petitioner seeks review of the BIA’s decision denying his motion to reopen based on a change in law that arguably entitles him to relief from removal. The BIA denied petitioner John Marcus Ramsay’s motion, concluding that he failed to act with reasonable due diligence. Petitioner also moved for a stay of his removal during the pendency of his petition and any subsequent remand before the BIA. Because we conclude that the BIA’s conclusion relied on a misreading of Ramsay’s arguments below, we GRANT Ramsay’s petition challenging the BIA’s order denying his motion to reopen and his motion to stay his removal, and we REMAND for further consideration consistent with this opinion. * The Clerk of Court is directed to amend the caption as set forth above.  MATTHEW A. LEMBO, Perkins Coie, LLP, New York, NY (Zoey Jones, Brooklyn Defender Services, Brooklyn, NY, on the brief), for Petitioner. BRETT F. KINNEY, Senior Litigation Counsel; Yaakov M. Roth, Acting Assistant Attorney General; David J. Schor, Senior Litigation Counsel; Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. PER CURIAM: Petitioner John Marcus Ramsay, a 70-year-old Jamaican man, immigrated to the United States and became a lawful permanent resident in 1971. During his residency in the United States, Ramsay served in the United States Navy and started both a family and a small business. On January 31, 2006, Ramsay was charged as removable based on a 1996 conviction for the attempted sale of a “narcotic drug” in violation of New York Penal Law (NYPL) §§ 110.00 and 220.39(1). Ramsay was subsequently deported to Jamaica in April 2007. In 2025, while Ramsay’s petition was pending before this Court, he was granted parole to reenter the United States as a previously deported US Navy veteran. He returned to the United States on March 24, 2025, and was granted parole to remain in the United States until March 23, 2026. 2  On September 6, 2023, this Court held for the first time that the narcotic definition in Ramsay’s statute of conviction, NYPL § 220.39(1), was categorically overbroad as compared to the federal Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. § 802. See United States v. Minter, 80 F.4th 406, 411–12 (2d Cir. 2023). This decision meant that he had been removed on the basis of a statute that no longer made him removable. Within thirty days of our decision in Minter, Ramsay moved the BIA to reconsider or reopen his prior removal order pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(6)– (7), 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii), and 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a). On November 24, 2023, the BIA denied Ramsay’s motions, finding that Ramsay failed to show “the requisite due diligence to warrant equitable tolling of the time limits on motions to reconsider and reopen.” Admin. Rec. at 3. Ramsay now seeks review of the BIA’s decision denying his motions. In re John Marcus Ramsay, No. A 030 062 041 (B.I.A. Nov.