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 US Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday against a non-US citizen who was contesting his indictment for unlawful re-entry into the country. In 1998, an immigration judge found that Palomar-Santiago had committed an aggravated felony under the federal immigration laws when he was convicted for driving under the influence.
The US Supreme Court has lifted a stay that prohibited the enforcement of a Texas law that criminalizes illegal entry into the state from other countries, allowing the law to go into effect. The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit later blocked that injunction, allowing the law to go into effect.
On Monday, the court will hear argument in a pair of cases, Pugin v. While aggravated felonies were initially limited to a few serious crimes, Congress has expanded the list to encompass a broader array of criminal activity, including – in 1996 – “offenses relating to the obstruction of justice.” Share In 1948, Justice William O.
“Is Encouraging Unauthorized Immigration Free Speech or a Felony? The Supreme Court will decide whether a 1986 law that makes it a crime to urge people to stay in the United States unlawfully can be squared with the First Amendment.” The post “Is Encouraging Unauthorized Immigration Free Speech or a Felony?
Share The Supreme Court on Monday unanimously ruled against a non-U.S. Eight years later, an immigration judge found that his California conviction for driving under the influence was an aggravated felony under the federal immigration laws. But six years after his deportation, the Supreme Court ruled in Leocal v.
immigration enforcement has largely shifted from the street to jails, resulting in overreach and an increase in incarceration, according to a North Carolina law professor. Jailhouse screening” was supposed to speed up immigration processes and identify undocumented immigrants who posed a threat to public safety.
Cordero-Garcia , the justices sought to define the contours of an “offense relating to the obstruction of justice,” which is one among the prior convictions that subjects noncitizens to mandatory removal from the United States as an “aggravated felony.” The argument on Monday did not provide a clear path forward.
The US Supreme Court granted certiorari to hear United States v. The ACCA prohibits the purchase and possession of firearms by felons, fugitives, drug addicts, undocumented immigrants, dishonorably discharged members of the Armed Forces, those under domestic violence restraining orders, and others. ” United States v.
The case is in the US District Court for the Western District of Texas Austin Division. The law creates a misdemeanor offense for violation of the statute and a felony crime for multiple offenses. This is not the only litigation involving Texas and the federal government over immigration. Last month, Abbott signed SB 4.
Share Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Monday morning read: Is Encouraging Unauthorized Immigration Free Speech or a Felony? The Supreme Court’s back door ( Katherine Long & Jack Newsham, Business Insider).
The US Supreme Court on Tuesday heard oral arguments in HollyFrontier Cheyenne Refining, LLC v Renewable Fuels Association , a case regarding exemptions for small refineries from the Renewable Fuel Standards Program, and United States v Palomar-Santiago , which involves immigration law and noncitizen re-entry.
Nonetheless, New York prosecutors charged Jose with second-degree criminal possession of a weapon, a “violent felony” that applies to virtually all simple firearm possession cases in New York, both outside and inside the home. City of Chicago , the court recognized a constitutional right to possess a firearm in self-defense.
Director Nils Muižnieks issued his statement after Greece’s Court of Appeal of Mytilene dropped some of the misdemeanor charges previously laid against the volunteers. Both defendants will still face trial for the remaining felony charges against them. . All we want is justice. We want this to go to trial.
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. Back in January, we noted that the Supreme Court had relisted five petitions challenging the constitutionality of the controversial practice of acquitted-conduct sentencing.
One hidden reason for the high numbers at the federal level is the arrest of undocumented immigrants who returned to the U.S. They account for about one-third of the federal revocations for criminal conduct, turning supervised release into “a tool of immigration enforcement,” he added. Returning to the U.S.
By night he drafted court documents for judges to sign. As a subsequent ruling by the Texas Court of Appeals finally made clear, the arrangement was not a momentary lapse in judgment or a one-time offense induced under pressure. They complained to an immigration and employment attorney about long hours and poor living conditions.
Supreme Court recently agreed to consider a case that is expected to define the scope of federal identity theft law. The specific issue before the Court in Dubin v. After a district court upheld the convictions, Dubin appealed. Issues Before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court granted certiorari on November 22, 2022.
Share The Petitions of the Week column highlights a selection of cert petitions recently filed in the Supreme Court. A trial court in Arizona agreed that Bassett was entitled to a hearing. On appeal, however, the Arizona Supreme Court denied Bassett’s request for a hearing and dismissed his petition for post-conviction relief.
Share The Petitions of the Week column highlights a selection of cert petitions recently filed in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has ruled that the seating of a biased juror can violate the constitutional right to an impartial jury. The state supreme court disagreed. Three justices dissented from the denial of review.
8 for a packed session of oral arguments – starting with immigration policy and the post-9/11 “No Fly List” and ending on Jan. Singh , in which the court will consider what kind of notice the government must provide before a noncitizen can be deported for not appearing in court. Smith was charged with five felony counts.
Actions of note at yesterday’s Supreme Court conference included: Supreme Court rejects challenge to continuation of Governor’s emergency declaration. The court granted review in Leon v. ” The court depublished the opinion of the Second District, Division Eight, in People v. .” discovery case.
The Supreme Court today announced it will hear eight cases on it June calendar. Because the court does not conduct oral arguments during the summer, these will be the last arguments until September. The case presents issues relating to petitions for Special Immigrant Findings under Code of Civil Procedure section 155. . :
The US Supreme Court ruled Friday in US v. The crux of the case rests on Article III of the US Constitution, which governs the Court’s judicial purview. The crux of the case rests on Article III of the US Constitution, which governs the Court’s judicial purview. SCOTUS [the Supreme Court] gives the Biden Admin.
US Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito indefinitely extended a stay blocking the enforcement of a Texas law that criminalizes illegal entry into the state from other countries. The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit later stayed that injunction, allowing the law to go into effect.
Share Federal immigration law requires the deportation of noncitizens who are convicted of an aggravated felony, which includes offenses “relating to obstruction of justice.” By a vote of 6-3, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday in Pugin v. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit held in Pugin’s case that it did not.
With the decriminalization of jaywalking in Nevada , Virginia and now California — the “ Freedom to Walk ” Act will take effect in Los Angeles in the new year — it appears that people understand this when it comes to jaywalking, but not when it comes to immigration. . In 1969, the Supreme Court held in Shapiro v. Controlling Movement.
Texas and Louisiana filed suit against the federal government Tuesday in the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas, alleging that immigration authorities declined to take custody of convicted individuals who could be subject to deportation.
The US Supreme Court voted 5-4 on Monday to permit federal border patrol agents to cut the razor wire that Texas installed on the US-Mexico border. The Supreme Court will address the case in full this session. The post US Supreme Court allows federal agents to cut Texas border fencing appeared first on JURIST - News.
Share The Supreme Court on Tuesday added five new cases – two of which will be argued together – to its docket for the 2024-25 term. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit upheld the law. As the case comes to the Supreme Court, the dispute centers on the proper test to determine the law’s constitutionality. In Hewitt v.
. “ The Executive Branch of the United States has a constitutional duty to enforce federal laws protecting States, including immigration laws on the books right now ,” Governor Abbott’s statement reads.
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. 23 conference and the April 12 conference — that’s six conferences — the Supreme Court relisted just one new case. This week, the court also began clearing out some relists that have been hanging around for a while.
The ACCA extends the minimum sentence – from 10 years to 15 – for an individual who had been convicted of a felony and possesses a firearm when that person has at least three “serious drug offenses.” On appeal, the Georgia Supreme Court threw out both of the jury’s verdicts and sent the case back for a new trial on all charges.
Share The Petitions of the Week column highlights a selection of cert petitions recently filed in the Supreme Court. A person held in state prison can challenge the constitutionality of their criminal conviction in federal court through a legal tool known as a writ of habeas corpus. In Clements v.
1326 , they must prove the existence of a prior removal order adjudicated by a federal immigration agency. Refugio Palomar-Santiago’s case illustrates two broader themes: first, the various interactions between the civil immigration and criminal legal systems, and second, the ongoing complexity of the immigration laws.
Civil rights groups filed a complaint on Thursday against Iowa state officials to stop the state’s recently enacted immigration law from going into effect on July 1. The law makes it a crime for a foreign national to enter Iowa after having been deported from the US in the past, regardless of current immigration status.
There is nothing unlawful about conveying individuals who are lawfully in the country pending their immigration hearings. Many migrants are released soon after capture, including some without a hearing date or court dates that are years in the future. The reason is that these claims are made for cable news, not courts of law.
On April 13, 2018, in the Circuit Court of Arlington County, Virginia, Commonwealth’s Attorney Theo Stamos staked her position on sentencing for a man convicted of a misdemeanor and a low-level felony. Norway is predominantly ethnically Norwegian, but the immigrant population also tripled from 1998 to 2013.
Research and practice suggest lie detector tests have zero scientific basis, are far too open to individual bias and partial interpretation, and have been sharply questioned by the courts. My circle of family and friends comprises veteran immigration agents and persons with significant law enforcement experience.
The bill creates a misdemeanor offense for violation of the statute and a felony crime for multiple offenses. It also empowers state magistrate judges to hear immigration cases and issue removal orders in addition to giving law enforcement the responsibility of ensuring compliance with the law.
In 1977, the Supreme Court ruled in Trans World Airlines v. The court agreed on Friday to review the case of Gerald Groff, a Christian and U.S. Groff went to federal court, where he argued that USPS had failed to provide him with reasonable accommodations for his religious practices. Counterman v.
But a Stanford University researcher argues that basing deportation decisions of immigrants on the level of criminality without looking at the length of time they have been in the U.S. disrupts families and turns immigration services into a vehicle for crime control. longer, they are disrupting families with stronger ties to the U.S.,
“Supreme Court Weighs Reviving Biden Immigration Guidelines; The justices wrestled with questions about states’ standing to sue, whether the guidelines were lawful and the limits of judicial power over immigration”: Adam Liptak of The New York Times has this report. ” David G. ” David G.
needs to radically change existing immigration laws and policies to shift away from the mindset of “migrant sorting” by criminal status, according to a paper published in the Daedalus journal. Immigration and Criminal Justice Intertwined. The presidency of Donald Trump augmented this trend and brought it to public attention.
Pritzker, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, and other state officials Thursday over state laws that limit local law enforcement from aiding federal immigration authorities. The Constitution carves out immigration authority as one of these areas. The DOJ also argued that the state laws conflict with congressional intent.
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