article thumbnail

US Supreme Court rules states lack constitutional standing in key immigration case

JURIST

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 US District Court Southern District of Texas ruled in favor of the states, enjoining Homeland Security from enforcing the memorandum.

article thumbnail

US Supreme Court rules against Mexico citizen contesting indictment

JURIST

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.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Texas governor asserts state right to self-defense in response to escalating southern border tensions

JURIST

. “ 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.

article thumbnail

Freedom of Movement: Understanding Immigration Through The Lens Of Jaywalking Laws

The Crime Report

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. . When someone ‘jaywalks’ from the Mexican side of the border to the U.S.

article thumbnail

Court expands government’s ability to deport noncitizens for offenses related to obstruction of justice

SCOTUSBlog

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. Such “redundancies are common in statutory drafting,” Kavanaugh wrote.

Felony 94
article thumbnail

Court rejects non-citizen’s challenge to criminal re-entry charge

SCOTUSBlog

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. The Court briefly addressed some of Palomar-Santiago’s arguments.

Court 129
article thumbnail

Court to decide requirements for noncitizens defending against federal prosecution for criminal re-entry

SCOTUSBlog

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.