Remove Court Remove Immigration Remove Litigating Remove Statute
article thumbnail

Supreme Court hears oral arguments in crucial immigration and ERISA cases

JURIST

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Monday in Patel v. Garland (“the immigration case”) asking whether a federal court can review a decision by an agency within the Department of Justice ruling that a person is ineligible for permanent residency and in Hughes v. Thus, Patel sought review before the Supreme Court.

article thumbnail

Justices grapple with question of federal court review in immigration cases

SCOTUSBlog

Share The Supreme Court on Monday heard oral argument in Patel v. 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.

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

Justices will decide scope of judicial review over certain immigration decisions

SCOTUSBlog

Garland raises an important question about whether a federal court can review a decision by an agency within the Department of Justice that a noncitizen is ineligible for a green card. The Supreme Court will hear oral argument in the case on Monday. In 2012, Patel was placed in deportation proceedings before an immigration judge.

article thumbnail

Federal ban on inducing unlawful immigration for financial gain may get another Supreme Court test

SCOTUSBlog

Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. After a few slow weeks on the relist front, the Supreme Court came roaring back this week with four newly relisted petitions that, if granted, will likely be added to the March 2023 argument calendar.

article thumbnail

The demise of rights-protective statutory interpretation for detained immigrants and the rise of “piecemeal” textualism

SCOTUSBlog

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.

article thumbnail

US DOJ sues Texas over state law criminalizing illegal entry from abroad

JURIST

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.

article thumbnail

Justices will revisit whether certain noncitizens in lengthy detention are entitled to bond hearings

SCOTUSBlog

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.