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 Oklahoma House of Representatives passed House Bill 4156 on Thursday by a vote of 77-20, which proposes the creation of the criminal act of impermissible occupation, targeting individuals who willfully enter and remain in Oklahoma without legal authorization to be in the United States.
US Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond submitted an appeal to the US Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Wednesday. The appeal challenges a court order against a preliminary injunction that halts the controversial anti-illegal immigration House Bill 4156 in the state.
The hearing was initiated by House Republicans who accused Mayorkas of failing to follow immigration law and of violating the public trust as border crossings have reached record levels. The Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond claimed that Mayorkas has not held the criminal foreign nationals accountable.
The report cited 34 USC Section 12601 as the legal authority for the investigation, which prohibits law enforcement officers from engaging in a “pattern or practice of conduct” that “deprives persons of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.”
justice tech company and a Ukrainian legal aid organization have joined forces to launch a first-of-its-kind European pro bono portal to assist with relief efforts for Ukrainians affected by the war. Read about Paladin on the LawNext Legal Technology Directory. Legal aid is just as necessary for them as humanitarian aid.
The states of Oklahoma, Arizona, Arkansas, Kentucky, Missouri, Nebraska and Texas also filed a brief in support , citing “a longstanding commitment to protecting private property rights.” ” In defending the regulation, the state of California argued that the businesses view the regulation too broadly.
” Garland led the Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation into the 1995 Oklahoma City Bombing. ” Through a myriad of topics, including college admissions, the border and immigration, and social media, Garland continuously swore to keep politics out of his investigations and processes in the DOJ: I know these are divisive times.
The justices heard arguments in six cases, which addressed issues ranging from methods of execution for death-row inmates to whether a high school football coach should be able to pray at midfield to the federal government’s controversial “remain in Mexico” immigration policy. Oklahoma v.
Now represented by former solicitor general, former head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, and prominent conservative lawyer Ted Olson , the ACLU asks for the justices’ review, arguing that “transparency of the judicial process is central to the rule of law.”. Garland is an immigration case. relisted after the Sept.
The Oklahoma State Board of Educationon Tuesday to approved a new administrative rule proposed by State Superintendent Ryan Waltersthat would require parents to disclose their children’s immigration status when enrolling them in school. The Oklahoma proposal awaits final approvals from the governor and state legislature.
United States (April 19): Whether a district court can reopen a judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(1) , which allows the court to do so because of “mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect,” if the original judgment was based on a legal error by the district court. immigration court. Oklahoma v.
Subscribe to her Substack, Legal Ethics Roundup, here. Welcome to what captivates, haunts, inspires, and surprises me every week in the world of legal ethics. The orders come as Trumps attack on the legal profession has divided the most prestigious firms in the US. Read more here (gift link). Read more here.
CNN noted that prominent legal figures like Leonard Leo of the Federalist Society have argued that the criticism is an overreaction to a procedural ruling, not a substantive one. Her concern over premature judicial intervention suggests a conservative reluctance to expand judicial power in immigration policy. In Biden v.
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