Washington v. Trump, Jan. 23, 2025 "There is a strong likelihood that Plaintiffs will succeed on the merits of their claims that the Executive Order violates the Fourteenth Amendment and Immigration...
Rachel Riley, Law360, Jan. 23, 2025 (subscription) "A Washington federal judge has paused enforcement of President Donald Trump's executive order limiting birthright citizenship, calling the...
NIPNLG, Jan. 22, 2025 "Recently, America First Legal sent letters to various state and local officials across the country, wrongly and deceptively arguing that sanctuary policies are not only illegal...
Interim Guidance: Civil Immigration Enforcement Actions in or near Courthouses "This memorandum provides interim guidance governing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) civil immigration...
DOJ, Jan. 21, 2025 - Interim Policy Changes Regarding Charging, Sentencing and Immigration Enforcement
Singh v. Garland
"Can lips which once lied ever utter truths? In immigration cases, it depends upon who answers that question and upon what was said. In the Ninth Circuit, we recognize that immigration judges (“IJs”)—but not the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”)—have the prerogative to answer that question by using the maxim falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus (“false in one thing, false in everything”). Here, however, the BIA used that prerogative to discredit petitioner Ranjit Singh’s affidavit in support of his motion to reopen because Singh had been found not credible by an IJ in his prior removal proceedings, but as to facts quite unlike those he asserted in his motion to reopen. We hold that such blanket reliance on a prior adverse credibility determination that was based on dissimilar facts contravenes the law of the Ninth Circuit. We therefore grant Singh’s petition for review and remand."