In the case of Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Joseph Patrick Doherty, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in 1991 that a convicted Irish terrorist could be deported from the United States. The defendant, Joseph Patrick Doherty, was a member of the Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA) who had been convicted for murder in Britain but escaped to America while awaiting trial. He sought asylum in America on grounds that he would face political persecution if returned to Britain. However, his application was denied by an immigration judge and later affirmed by Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). On appeal before federal courts including Supreme Court, it was held that BIA did not abuse its discretion when it considered factors such as seriousness of crime committed abroad while denying relief under section 243(h) of Immigration and Nationality Act which prohibits deportation if alien's life or freedom would be threatened due to race, religion etc., thereby affirming deportation order against Doherty.

In the dissenting opinion for Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Joseph Patrick Doherty, Justice Blackmun argued that the majority's decision was a misinterpretation of immigration law and an overreach of judicial authority. He contended that the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) had acted within its discretion when it reopened Doherty's deportation proceedings based on new evidence about conditions in Northern Ireland. The BIA, he noted, has broad power to reconsider its decisions as circumstances change or new information comes to light. Furthermore, he criticized the majority for substituting their judgment for that of immigration officials who are better equipped to assess these complex issues. In his view, this case should have been remanded back to BIA so they could properly consider whether Doherty deserved asylum under U.S law.