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
(He might have had to answer some more difficult questions, though, since he was even then seeking to regularize his immigration status after entering the United States unlawfully.) citizen for a benefit under state law. The court also has a pair of new administrativelaw cases, both captioned American Hospital Association v.
A state court in Texas entered a restraining order against the defendant in the case, Zackey Rahimi, in early 2020. 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.
On August 21, CBP announced McAllen Border Patrol Station agents attempted to initiate an immigration inspection of the occupants of a vehicle departing a well-known migrant loading area in Los Ebanos. The driver failed to yield and led agents on a vehicle pursuit. International Trade Commission.
A US federal judge Friday granted a request to dismiss a policy by President Joe Biden’s administration that narrows the detaining and deportation of immigrants. ” US District Court for the Southern District of Texas Judge Drew Tipton said in his opinion that enforcing the memo is “arbitrary and capricious.”
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. Texas and Louisiana went to federal court in Texas to challenge the policy. William Hennessy).
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.
Texas presents the latest stage in the Biden administration’s attempt to unwind the Trump administration’s “remain in Mexico” policy. immigration court. Texas abortion law. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit to send their challenge to Texas’ restrictive anti-abortion law back to U.S.
Share The Biden administration on Friday asked the Supreme Court for an immediate reprieve from having to reinstate a Trump-era program known as the “remain in Mexico” policy, which requires asylum seekers at the U.S.-Mexico immigration court. Mexico border to stay in Mexico while they wait for a hearing in U.S.
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.
Last term, the court dismissed as improvidently granted, or “DIG”ed , a case brought by Republican-controlled states challenging the government’s repeal of a Trump-era immigration policy known as the “public charge” rule. In Texas v. A list of this week’s featured petitions is below: Texas v. Cook County, Illinois.
Share The Supreme Court will again weigh the executive branch’s authority to set immigration policy as some red states claim that the Biden administration’s enforcement decisions are too lax. Texas and Louisiana went to federal court in Texas to challenge the policy. The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Garland v.
The Scramble to Identify Major Questions in AdministrativeLaw In its June 2022 decision in West Virginia v. The challenge of meeting changing conditions in administrativelaw is known as the pacing problem: scientific and technological developments will nearly always outstrip the pace of government oversight. Env’t Prot.
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