News here . Screening and referral form here . Settlement agreement here .
Just Security "This public resource tracks legal challenges to Trump administration actions. If you think we are missing anything, you can email us at lte@justsecurity.org . Special thanks to Just...
PM 25-20 - CANCELLATION OF DIRECTOR’S MEMORANDUM 23-02
In Tumi v. Higgins , Vermont Federal District Judge Geoffrey W. Crawford ruled that USCIS' denial of Tumi's O-1A visa petition on behalf of famous designer Nicolas Baurain was arbitrary and capricious...
Here is the Memo; here is the Order. NOTE: Earlier today, Thursday, Feb. 6, 2025, Senior U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour GRANTED a Preliminary Injunction in WA v. Trump. I will post his Memo and...
Ud Din v. Garland
"[A] question arises as to how the Ud Dins’ removal will affect their future ability to apply for reentry to the United States. A permanent and unwaivable bar on reentry applies to any alien who filed a frivolous claim for asylum after receiving notice of that consequence. Otherwise, the alien may be subject to lesser, waivable bars on reentry. Because this court cannot determine on the present record whether the Ud Dins received the notice required to trigger a permanent, unwaivable bar, we grant review as to that single question and remand for the limited purpose of allowing the agency to make an express finding as to notice and, based on that finding, to specify the scope of the reentry bar that will attend the Ud Dins’ removal. ... (1) We DENY the Ud Dins’ petition for review of their removal orders insofar as they challenge the agency’s (a) discretionary decision to deny their applications for adjustment of status, and (b) frivolousness determination as to their untimely filed asylum applications. (2) We GRANT the Ud Dins’ petition for review of their removal orders insofar as they challenge the agency’s finding that they received the notice required to hold them ineligible for adjustment of status based on the filing of frivolous asylum applications. (3) We REMAND for the limited purpose of allowing the agency to make an express finding as to notice consistent with principles stated in this opinion and, based on that finding, to specify the scope of the reentry bar that will attend the Ud Dins’ removal."
[Hats off to Michael Z. Goldman!]