Tunis v. Gonzales, 447 F.3d 547 (7th Cir. May 15, 2006) (Wisconsin conviction of two counts of selling less than a gram of cocaine, with two years suspended sentence, with seven months actual custody ordered, constituted aggravated felony drug trafficking convictions, under INA 101(a)(43)(B), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(B), and thus particularly serious crimes under 8 U.S.C.

United States v. Zajanckauskas, 441 F.3d 32 (1st Cir. Mar. 23, 2006) (U.S. naturalized citizenship of a former soldier in the German Army who participated in the clearing of the Warsaw Ghetto during WWII is revoked).
http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/1st/051457.html

Afridi v. Gonzales, 442 F.3d 1212 (9th Cir. Apr. 4, 2006) (BIA acted arbitrarily in failing to consider the facts of noncitizens California conviction for unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor in applying Frentescu standard to decide whether conviction constituted a "particularly serious crime" for purposes of withholding of removal).

Tunis v. Gonzales, 447 F.3d 547 (7th Cir. May 15, 2006) (Wisconsin conviction of two counts of selling less than a gram of cocaine, with two years suspended sentence, with seven months actual custody ordered, constituted aggravated felony drug trafficking convictions, under INA 101(a)(43)(B), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(B), and thus particularly serious crimes under 8 U.S.C.

Tran v. Gonzales, __ F.3d __ (6th Cir. May 17, 2006) (IIRAIRA properly applied to pre-IIRAIRA conviction)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/6th/043800p.pdf

Sandoval v. US Attorney Gen., 440 F.3d 1276 (11th Feb. 27, 2006) (expedited removal regulation, 8 C.F.R. 241.8, is not ultra vires to statute, and does not violate due process; statute is not impermissibly retroactive when applied to a noncitizen who illegally re-entered the United States after IIRAIRA; reinstatement statute is not in conflict with INA 245(i) provisions). http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/11th/0412223p.pdf

Fernandez-Vargas v. Gonzales, ___ U.S. ___ (Mar. 22, 2006) (granting certiorari to answer "whether and under what circumstances INA 241(a)(5) applies to an alien who reentered the United States illegally before the effective date of IIRAIRA, April 1, 1997.").

Tanov v. INS, 443 F.3d 195 (2d Cir. Apr. 4, 2006) (former suspension of deportation is unavailable to noncitizens who were paroled into and then ordered excluded from the United States prior to April 1, 1997).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/2nd/034321p.pdf

Geach v. Chartoff, 444 F.3d 940 (8th Cir. Mar. 2, 2006) (advance parole regulation, 8 C.F.R. 245.2(a)(4)(ii) (1991) (amended 1996), denies suspension of deportation to aliens admitted on advance parole, but who otherwise meet the statutory requirements for suspension).

If the District Director terminates a refugee's Refugee Status under INA 207.9, and the ex-refugee is put into INA 240 removal proceedings, he apparently cannot contest that termination before the IJ, or in any other forum, because INA 207.9 states: "there is no appeal under this chapter from the termination of refugee status by the district director."