This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The Danish Court of Impeachment, or Rigsretten, Monday sentenced former Danish immigration minister Inger Støjberg to 60 days in prison. As immigration minister, Støjberg was responsible for administrating and enforcing Danish immigrationlaw during the 2015 European migration crisis.
Ask a Law Librarian. A visit to a law library is an ideal way to start. As a newbie to the topic, computer legal research can present too large a universe. That could be anything from an immigration petition to a blue sky filing. Investigate Continuing Legal Education and Specialty Bar Groups. You’re smart.
The main issue before the court is”[w]hether a court of appeals may conclusively presume that an asylum applicant’s testimony is credible and true whenever an immigration judge or the Board of Immigration Appeals adjudicates an application without making an explicit adverse credibility determination.”
Share The nation’s immigration courts are breaking under the cumulative weight of a byzantine statutory scheme, chronic understaffing, and insurmountable case backlogs. She was detained and subsequently applied for a type of humanitarian relief known as “withholding of removal” under the Immigration & Nationality Act.
Legal Services Alabama, Inc. , 1252(a)(2)(D) bars review of an asserted question of law where a noncitizen has challenged the Board of Immigration Appeals’ interpretation of the statutory extreme hardship standard found at 8 U.S.C. CVSG: 5/18/2023 (relisted after the June 22 conference) Davis v.
To enforce these laws, Congress created the SEC. It granted the agency the power to regulate investors through either lawsuits in federal court or internal hearings in front of an administrativelaw judge, or ALJ. A divided three-judge panel issued its decision in May of last year, nearly a decade after the legal battle began.
He is coauthor of a casebook on administrativelaw and has written many articles on that subject. There has never been any mystery about the jurisprudential premises of Justice Stephen Breyer’s approach to issues of public law. Similarly, in Lucia v. Breyer has always displayed ambivalence toward this doctrine.
Speaking to a Policy Exchange forum, he declared that in Britain “we have something very proud of, which is a world-leading legal profession. Legal Services in this country actually are fundamental to everything we do across a wide range of areas.”
Share The Supreme Court heard oral argument on Tuesday in a challenge to a Biden administration policy that prioritizes certain groups of unauthorized immigrants for arrest and deportation. District Judge Drew Tipton agreed with the states that the policy violates federal law and vacated it nationwide.
The Biden administration seeks a declaration that it may cease enforcement of the “Remain in Mexico” immigration policy first implemented by former President Trump. First, the Trump administration relied on 8 USC § 1225(b)(2)(C) to institute the MPP. Respondent must file their brief on April 7, 2022.
The Attorneys General of Arizona and Montana filed an amended a joint lawsuit Monday alleging that the Biden administration has violated immigration and administrativelaw. The allegations arise from changes to policies governing the detention and deportation of undocumented immigrants.
immigration court. After Texas and Missouri challenged that decision, a federal district court vacated the secretary’s termination, in part on the administrative-law ground that the decision was insufficiently explained. solicitor general argues that the statutory basis for the Trump administration’s policy, 8 U.S.C.
Share The Supreme Court will hear oral argument on Tuesday in a dispute over the Biden administration’s authority to set immigration policy. Texas and Louisiana are challenging a federal policy that prioritizes certain groups of unauthorized immigrants for arrest and deportation, arguing that it violates federal law.
The Scramble to Identify Major Questions in AdministrativeLaw In its June 2022 decision in West Virginia v. Following the West Virginia decision, analysis of the MQD has proliferated as legal scholars grapple with the doctrine’s lack of definition. Env’t Prot.
Innovation Law Lab , a challenge to the Trump administration’s “remain in Mexico” policy, which allows the Department of Homeland Security to return immigrants seeking asylum to Mexico while they wait for an asylum hearing in U.S. immigration courts. Democratic National Committee and Arizona Republican Party v.
The book is unlikely to change many minds, however, because it betrays the very fault of which it accuses the court: It advances a vision of correct decision-making rooted more in partisan policy preferences than in neutral legal criteria. Even so, I am skeptical that the court will alter the law as dramatically as Millhiser fears.
Share The Supreme Court heard oral argument on Wednesday in a case involving whether a group of states can defend a contentious Trump-era immigration policy known as the “public charge” rule after the Biden administration refused to do so. alleging that the repeal of the law violated federal administrativelaw.
How Trumps Upheaval is Reshaping Your Legal Career By Chere B. Initially, we envisioned a lighthearted discussion on emerging job trends in the legal field where opportunities were growing and how professionals could position themselves for success. Will You Survive? Today, I want to share that message with you.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content