Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.
LexisNexis® CLE On-Demand features premium content from partners like American Law Institute Continuing Legal Education and Pozner & Dodd. Choose from a broad listing of topics suited for law firms, corporate legal departments, and government entities. Individual courses and subscriptions available.
NY v. Barr
"To summarize, we conclude as follows: (1) The Attorney General was statutorily authorized to impose all three challenged conditions on Byrne grant applications. a. The Certification Condition (1) is statutorily authorized by 34 U.S.C. § 10153(a)(5)(D)’s requirement that applicants comply with “all other applicable Federal laws,” and (2) does not violate the Tenth Amendment’s anticommandeering principle; b. The Notice Condition is statutorily authorized by 34 U.S.C. § 10153(a)(4)’s reporting requirement, § 10153(a)(5)(C)’s coordination requirement, and § 10155’s rule‐making authority; c. The Access Condition is statutorily authorized by 34 U.S.C. § 10153(a)(5)(C)’s coordination requirement, and § 10155’s rule‐making authority. (2) The Attorney General did not overlook important detrimental effects of the challenged conditions so as to make their imposition arbitrary and capricious. Accordingly, (1) We REVERSE the district court’s award of partial summary judgment to plaintiffs; (2) We VACATE the district court’s mandate ordering defendants to release withheld 2017 Byrne funds to plaintiffs, as well as its injunction barring defendants from imposing the three challenged immigration‐related conditions on such grants; and (3) We REMAND the case to the district court, a. with directions that it enter partial summary judgment in favor of defendants on plaintiffs’ challenge to the three immigration‐related conditions imposed on 2017 Byrne Program grants; and b. insofar as there remains pending in the district court plaintiffs’ challenge to conditions imposed by defendants on 2018 Byrne Program grants, for further proceedings consistent with this opinion."