HowAppealing

MARCH 10, 2025

Five Questions About the Khalil Case: The government’s arrest and detention of a pro-Palestinian Columbia student (and green card holder) raises difficult questions about both technical immigration statutes and the First Amendment.” ” Steve Vladeck has this post at his “One First” Substack site.

Statute 100

Statute Immigration Government 100

SCOTUSBlog

DECEMBER 7, 2021

Garland , an immigration case that raises a question about federal court review for noncitizens who were denied certain types of discretionary relief. First, the applicant must meet precise eligibility requirements under the statute. Second, immigration officials must exercise their discretion to grant the relief.

Immigration 137

Immigration Court Statute Government 137

JURIST

AUGUST 22, 2021

” The statute for apprehension and detention of non-citizen immigrants, 8 U.S. .” ” The statute for apprehension and detention of non-citizen immigrants, 8 U.S. Code § 1226 , did not previously specify the burden of proof to be met at immigration bond hearings.

Immigration 197

Immigration Court Statute Government 197

SCOTUSBlog

DECEMBER 3, 2021

Congress created a process known as “adjustment of status” so that immigrants physically present in the United States could change their status to that of a lawful permanent resident (i.e., In 2012, Patel was placed in deportation proceedings before an immigration judge. The Supreme Court will hear oral argument in the case on Monday.

Immigration 145

Immigration Statute Government Court 145

SCOTUSBlog

MAY 16, 2022

Share The Supreme Court on Monday limited the ability of federal courts to review certain factual findings in immigration proceedings that determine whether noncitizens will be deported or will be allowed to remain in the country. But the Supreme Court held that a federal immigration statute — 8 U.S.C. The ruling in Patel v.

Immigration 145

Immigration Court Statute Attorney 145

SCOTUSBlog

APRIL 29, 2021

Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the majority opinion, adopting a rigid interpretation of a federal statute that requires the government to serve a “notice to appear” in order to trigger the “stop-time” rule. That rule can foreclose access to immigration relief by preventing noncitizens from accruing the time required for eligibility.

Immigration 145

Immigration Court Rules Government Laws 145

SCOTUSBlog

APRIL 14, 2023

Congress extended the Immigration and Nationality Act, which regulates immigration into the United States, in 1988 to give immigration enforcement authorities, now the Department of Homeland Security, the power to automatically deport noncitizens convicted of an “aggravated felony” at the state or federal level.

Immigration 110

Immigration Statute Felony Court 110

JURIST

MAY 16, 2022

The US Supreme Court Monday held in a 5-4 opinion written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett “[f]ederal courts lack jurisdiction to review facts found as part of any judgment relating to the granting of discretionary relief in immigration proceedings enumerated under 8 US Code § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i).” ” In Patel v.

Immigration 197

Immigration Court Statute Laws 197

JURIST

JUNE 7, 2021

The US Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Monday on an immigrant status case regarding noncitizens seeking to change their immigration status from temporary protected status (TPS) to lawful permanent residency.

Immigration 188

Immigration Court Court Rules Statute 188

JURIST

MAY 25, 2021

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. In that case, it was held that under the relevant federal statute, DUI convictions such as that of Palomar-Santiago’s are not aggravated felonies.

Court Rules 196

Court Rules Court Felony Immigration 196

LawSites

JUNE 21, 2023

A new generative AI product for immigration lawyers announced today is designed to help them conduct research, draft and summarize complex legal documents, and engage with potential clients through a chat interface. “Immigration law is an incredibly complex, high-stakes area of law. Called Visalaw.ai Called Visalaw.ai

Immigration 111

Immigration Drafting Laws Legal Documents 111

SCOTUSBlog

JUNE 13, 2022

Pursuant to the post-removal order statute, 8 U.S.C. The question before the court was whether the post-removal order statute authorized his prolonged detention, and if so, whether the government was required to provide a bond hearing before an immigration judge after six months of detention. 1231 , the government detained him.

Immigration 98

Immigration Court Rules Statute Court 98

JURIST

APRIL 29, 2021

The report identified 11 themes common among many of the cases that signified a systemic pattern of racism, such as the use of pretextual stops that lead to excessive force, excessive use of lethal restraints, targeting of Black immigrants and complicity of legal actors in racist police killings through qualified immunity.

Immigration 265

Immigration Statute Legal Legal 265

SCOTUSBlog

JUNE 14, 2022

Share On Monday, the Supreme Court sided with the government in a pair of cases brought by noncitizens who are under deportation orders and were in lengthy detention, rejecting lower courts’ rights-protective interpretation of the relevant detention statute and blocking an important avenue for injunctive relief in immigration detention cases.

Immigration 96

Immigration Statute Government Court 96

SCOTUSBlog

APRIL 28, 2021

The charge of criminal re-entry requires the prior existence of a removal order entered by a federal immigration agency. That statute, 8 U.S.C. However, Ross resisted characterizing the removal order as either a “legal nullity” or equivalent to the immigration agency lacking jurisdiction to enter the order at all.

Immigration 98

Immigration Statute Government Legal 98

LegalReader

AUGUST 19, 2021

District Judge Miranda Du observed the racially charged beginnings of United States Code Section 1326, the first federal statute criminalizing illegal re-entry after deportation or removal. In her ruling, U.S.

Immigration 111

Immigration Statute Laws 111

Attorney at Work

MAY 31, 2022

The statute of limitations ran out due to his forgetting the deadline. A Chicago immigration lawyer moved for an emergency stay of removal for a client after an asylum application was denied. The Tennessee lawyer failed to add a calendar reminder to track the statute of limitations deadline.

Calendaring 313

Calendaring Court Lawyer Lawyers 313

JURIST

JUNE 8, 2022

” The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) found “that this conviction was a crime involving moral turpitude that made him ineligible for cancellation of removal” from the United States. ” The post Ninth Circuit rules possession of forged SSN is grounds for deportation appeared first on JURIST - News.

Construction 197

Construction Immigration Statute Government 197

SCOTUSBlog

JANUARY 10, 2022

Share The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Tuesday in two related immigration cases , Johnson v. In both cases, noncitizens who are under deportation orders are challenging their prolonged detention – sometimes many months or even years — without the safeguard of a bond hearing before an immigration judge. In Zadvydas v.

Immigration 145

Immigration Statute Government Court 145

SCOTUSBlog

JANUARY 12, 2021

The court must decide which of two federal statutes governs these migrants’ eligibility to be released on bond. But by statute, a withholding claim can be reviewed only as part of the review of a removal order. Surely, a final order of removal can’t mean one thing … in one statute and another in another.

Immigration 105

Immigration Statute Government Court 105

SCOTUSBlog

DECEMBER 9, 2022

Share The Supreme Court on Friday afternoon agreed to hear four new cases, including a First Amendment challenge to a federal law that prohibits encouraging illegal immigration. The post Justices take up four new cases, including challenge to federal ban on encouraging illegal immigration appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

Immigration 100

Immigration Statute Court Court Rules 100

SCOTUSBlog

DECEMBER 7, 2022

Helaman Hansen ran an immigration-advising service. Hansen charged undocumented immigrants to advise them on what he claimed was a pathway to U.S. District courts have discretion to impose either consecutive or concurrent sentences unless a statute mandates otherwise. Our first new relist this week, United States v.

Immigration 100

Immigration Court Statute Law Firms 100

SCOTUSBlog

MARCH 28, 2023

1324(a)(1)(iv) , the federal law that criminalizes “encouraging or inducing” an immigrant to come or remain in the United States unlawfully, violates the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech. She asked Fletcher, “[E]xactly how [do] you want us to rewrite the statute?” knowing full well that doing so would be unlawful.

Immigration 98

Immigration Laws Statute Government 98

SCOTUSBlog

SEPTEMBER 17, 2022

Helaman Hansen ran an immigration-advising service called Americans Helping America Chamber of Commerce. A federal court in California convicted Hansen of multiple counts of fraud, as well as convincing two of his customers to overstay their visas and participate in his adoption program in violation of the encourage-or-induce statute.

Immigration 73

Immigration Statute Government Tort 73

Paralegal Bootcamp

JULY 25, 2022

This includes the processes used to identify the laws and documents that apply to the facts of a specific case, including statutes, regulations, and court opinions. A large part of this consists of conducting legal research. This is why paralegal training in the skill of written communication is essential. A Protector.

Paralegal 246

Paralegal Paralegals Drafting Legal Assistance 246

SCOTUSBlog

JUNE 7, 2021

Mayorkas that adjustment of status is reserved for those who were inspected at the border and admitted to the United States by an immigration officer, thus disqualifying the majority of those granted Temporary Protected Status. The court ruled in Sanchez v. Justice Elena Kagan wrote the opinion for the court.

Immigration 138

Immigration Government Statute Court Rules 138

SCOTUSBlog

MAY 24, 2021

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. Ashcroft that, under the relevant federal statute, DUI convictions like Palomar-Santiago’s are not aggravated felonies.

Felony 127

Felony Court Immigration Statute 127

SCOTUSBlog

APRIL 20, 2023

He pointed to statutes that do not require a pending proceeding and claimed they were understood by courts to qualify as obstruction when Congress added the offense to the list of aggravated felonies. The post No clear path on how court will rule after oral arguments in two immigration cases Monday appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

Immigration 109

Immigration Felony Court Statute 109

SCOTUSBlog

JUNE 24, 2021

(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.) The post Immigration, takings, administrative law and the kitchen sink appeared first on SCOTUSblog. citizen for a benefit under state law.

Administrative Law 81

Administrative Law Immigration Laws Government 81

JURIST

JANUARY 3, 2024

The law 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. Last month, Abbott signed SB 4.

Immigration 118

Immigration Laws Misdemeanor Felony 118

Constitutional Law Reporter

SEPTEMBER 8, 2023

Supreme Court upheld a federal law that criminalizes “encouraging or inducing” an immigrant to come or remain in the United States unlawfully. In reaching its decision, the Court acknowledged that an expansive reading of the statute would render it unconstitutional. In United States v. Hansen , 599 U.S. _ (2023), the U.S.

Immigration 52

Immigration Court Statute Construction 52

SCOTUSBlog

JUNE 12, 2021

In asylum cases, the immigration judge is responsible for making credibility determinations as trier-of-fact. But the statute doesn’t say what the federal courts should do if the BIA fails to expressly find the presumption rebutted. The unanimous Supreme Court rejected that approach.

Immigration 102

Immigration Statute Court Government 102

SCOTUSBlog

JANUARY 6, 2021

statutes and regulations. The Immigration and Nationality Act allows migrants pursuing so-called “withholding only” relief to be released on bond at some point; the court must decide which release statute applies. Some courts hold that claims of U.S. citizenship may also be raised). 1231 governs. In addition, in Zadvydas v.

Immigration 122

Immigration Statute Government Court 122

At the Lectern

AUGUST 12, 2022

presents issues relating to petitions for Special Immigrant Findings under Code of Civil Procedure section 155. Whether a court lacks jurisdiction under article XIII B, section 6 of the California Constitution to make subvention findings on statutes that were not specifically identified in an initial test claim.

Immigration 49

Immigration Calendaring Statute Court 49

The Crime Report

FEBRUARY 16, 2023

This year, a number of officials and community advocates made arguments based on public safety and criminal justice concerns and initiatives that included addressing discovery burdens within New York’s court system, expanding neighborhood surveillance and investing in legal representation for immigrants in the state.

Immigration 97

Immigration Legal Services Legal Legal 97

SCOTUSBlog

JANUARY 14, 2023

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.

Immigration 92

Immigration Court Government Statute 92

JURIST

JULY 6, 2024

The legal position is that the statute requires “the most clear and explicit words” to constitute an ouster clause and override the presumption of legislative intention that executive decisions are justiciable by way of judicial review. The legal dispute arose from the well-established Anisminic principle in English common law.

Court 104

Court Immigration Litigation Litigating 104