Matter of M-A-M-

Summary

This case created the case law which governs competency in immigration proceedings. M-A-M- establishes both the competency standard and the Immigration Judge's obligation to investigate competency when there are indicia that a respondent may not be competent.

Holding

Respondents in immigration proceedings are presumed competent. If there are no indicia of incompetency, no further competency inquiry is required.

The test for competency is whether the respondent has a rational and factual understanding of the nature and object of the proceedings, can consult with an attorney or representative if there is one, and has a reasonable opportunity to examine and present evidence and cross-examine witnesses.

If there are indicia of incompetency, the Immigration Judge must make further inquiry to determine whether the respondent is competent for purposes of the proceedings.

If the respondent lacks sufficient competency to proceed, the Immigration Judge must evaluate appropriate safeguards.

Immigration Judges must articulate the rationale for their decisions regarding competency issues.

Notes

The way that this case law is put into practice is through what is literally called a 'MAM hearing'. This is confusing, of course, due to the existence of the Mayan language `Mam`, which is quite commonly seen in some US Immigration Courts, and the fact that the EOIR's internal 'language code' representing that language is, sigh, `MAM`, all caps. Of course, the citation for the case is `M-A-M-`, but when jurists refer to a `MAM hearing`, they leave the dashes out. Regardless of my issues with punctuation and proofreading: if the IJ finds that the respondent is not competent, the case doesn't just *go away*, the IJ implements safeguards to ensure that the respondent's rights are respected given the degree of their impairment.