This Court has reversed a deportation order in a case where the alien, although informed of her right to counsel, "waived her rights without being provided with any understanding by the immigration judge of the complexity of her dilemma and without any awareness of the cogent legal arguments which could have been made on her behalf."

—holding that the petitioner had not validly waived her right to counsel because the waiver was not "competently and understandingly made

—concluding that alien' s waiver of right to counsel not competently made where IJ failed to advise alien regarding complexity of her dilemma and available legal arguments

An alien may waive the right to appeal provided that the alien's decision is knowing and intelligent.

In eontrast, the Fifth Cireuit granted a motion to reopen deportation proeeedings for a person without a eriminal record on the basis that her "waiver of eounsel was not'eompetently and understandingly made'" and "the outeome of the proeeeding may have been different if eounsel had been present."

Notably, the Fifth Circuit recognizes that simply informing noncitizens of their rights in removal proceedings does not guarantee the validity of any purported waiver.

While courts find that the “procedural safeguards” given to immigrants in removal proceedings are substantial enough to protect their due process rights, these “safeguards” nonetheless consistently fail or are not administered by courts

Specifically, courts have repeatedly interpreted the deprivation of counsel as a violation of the due process requirement that immigration proceedings be "fundamentally fair