Could Joe Giudice actually have a fighting chance to stay in the United States?
According to 27 former immigration judges, the answer is yes, RadarOnline.com can exclusively reveal.
Court documents obtained exclusively by Radar reveal: "The Immigrant Rights Clinic of Washington Square Legal Services (IRC) respectfully seeks leave to file the accompanying late-filed proposed brief of amici curiae in support of Appellant (Giudice)..."
Pennsylvania court documents specifically state: "Amici curiae include 27 former Immigration Judges and members of the Board of Immigration Appeals who have an interest in the implications of a decision in this case on the lawfulness, fairness, and integrity of the immigration court system."
Per the IRC, the amici curiae are demanding that they appear before the Third Circuit Court judge to argue why the 47-year-old reality star should remain in the U.S.
The IRC argues that "although the time for filing a brief in support Petitioner's motion for a stay of removal has passed, amici curiae only became aware of this case recently."
In the past, the amici curiae have appeared on behalf of other immigration cases similar to Giudice's with great success.
The IRC then goes on to explain in court documents that Giudice's case has become an "issue of fundamental importance to integrity of the immigration court system."
They argue that in the past the Department of Homeland Security has violated the law and undermined the "legitimacy of the court system" when they issued thousands of "dummy dates" notices for immigration hearings that "do not exist." These cases specifically cater to petitions of 'Stay of Removal'" as such is the case of Joe.
"More than 1,000 immigrants showed up at courts across the United States on Jan. 31, 2019 for hearings they'd been told were scheduled but didn't exist," the court documents stated.
They go on to explain that "serious harms came from permitting removal cases to begin with a defective filing — either by confusing the respondent and the court about a false time and place, or by providing no time and place at all — far outweigh any administrative burden that will be placed on the system by strict compliance with the statute."
According to the IRC, they argue that "when the stakes are as high as they are in deportation cases, as we have seen in the thousands of cases we have presided over in our tenure, it is better for those charged with the responsibilities of the INA to adhere faithfully to the law."
A Radar previously reported, Joe filed a motion on April 24 to put the breaks on his removal from the country he’s lived in since he was a baby.
On April 25, a clerk granted the motion, thus delaying his deportation back to Italy.
“Order temporarily granting motion for stay of removal…Removal is stayed until such time as the Court can consider the motion for stay of removal,” the papers stated.
As Radar exclusively reported, Giudice was ordered removed by an immigration judge on October 10, 2018.
He filed an appeal a month later, but on April 11, the Executive Office of Immigration denied his request.
Radar confirmed he filed a petition for review with the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, and even filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Attorney General.
“We will continue to fight to keep Mr. Giudice in the United States, the only country he knows, and reunite him with his wife and four daughters,” his lawyer James J. Leonard Jr. said in a statement to Radar.
Most recently, Radar obtained documents revealing the Attorney General's strong position to kick Giudice out of the country as soon as possible.