Arizona v. Garland "This is a challenge by 19 states to an administrative action of the Executive Branch establishing a new procedure for adjudicating asylum applications under federal immigration...
Moran v. Mayorkas "At the time of Mr. Valadez Moran's birth, it is more likely than not that his mother, Ms. Moran, was a citizen of the United States by virtue of her birth in Elsa, Texas on...
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 04/19/2024 "Notice of a Memorandum of Cooperation (MOC) between the Government of the United States and the Government of Japan...
Courtesy of AILA; AILA Doc. 24022603 "The Department of State’s Office of the Assistant Legal Adviser for Consular Affairs (L/CA), in coordination with the Visa Office in the Bureau of Consular...
Abdulahad v. Garland "Walid Abdulahad petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (the “Board”) denial of his motion to reopen based on changed country conditions...
Kinsley v. Blinken
"Among the disruptions wrought by the COVID-19 pandemic have been halts and delays in the U.S. visa-processing system. Here, a large group of noncitizens, U.S.-citizen petitioners, associations, and corporations bring suit to challenge the cessation of visa processing in specified countries. They allege as unlawful Defendant State Department’s interpretation of several Presidential Proclamations to prevent U.S. consulates and embassies in those countries from adjudicating visas. In now seeking dismissal or summary judgment, the Government argues that the Court is barred from considering Plaintiffs’ claims for a range of jurisdictional reasons, and that, even if addressed, their claims are deficient. While the Court concurs with Defendants that some Plaintiffs lack standing or have claims that are now moot, it also concludes that, as to the nine remaining Plaintiffs, their claims are justiciable, and State acted improperly in suspending visa issuance based on the Proclamations. These Plaintiffs thus achieve summary judgment."