LexisNexis® Legal Newsroom
4-4 Tie at Supreme Court in U.S. v. Texas Blocks DAPA, DACA+

UNITED STATES, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. TEXAS, ET AL. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT [June 23, 2016] PER CURIAM. The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court. [Stand by for commentary & analysis later today...]

President Obama Delivers a Statement on the Supreme Court's Non-Ruling on Immigration

White House, June 23, 2016 - "[O]one of the reasons why America is such a diverse and inclusive nation is because we’re a nation of immigrants. Our Founders conceived of this country as a refuge for the world. And for more than two centuries, welcoming wave after wave of immigrants has kept...

Supreme Court on Categorical Approach: Mathis v. U.S.

Mathis v. U.S., June 23, 2016 - "[W]hether for good or for ill, the elements-based approach remains the law. And we will not introduce inconsistency and arbitrariness into our ACCA decisions by here declining to follow its requirements. Everything this Court has ever said about ACCA runs counter...

AILA Member Talking Points on SCOTUS United States v. Texas Deadlock

AILA Doc. No. 16062336, June 23, 2016 : "While today's split decision sets no Supreme Court precedent, what it does mean is that these important, commonsense policies will remain blocked for now. The fact remains, DAPA and DACA+ are initiatives that are lawful, constitutional, and consistent...

LexisNexis Expert Author Stephen W. Yale-Loehr on Supreme Court Immigration Order

"Stephen Yale-Loehr, an immigration law expert who teaches at Cornell University, agrees the ruling “doesn’t change anything for original DACA beneficiaries.”" - US News, June 23, 2016 . "Cornell law professor and immigration expert Stephen Yale-Loehr said the case...

Prof. Michael Olivas on Supreme Court Immigration Decision

Michael A. Olivas, June 23, 2016 - "[T]he narrow technical ruling on an injunction is not the same as a full-scale constitutional rejection of deferred action on its merits. For the time being, immigrant students eligible under the original DACA order can continue to seek its protection, and immigrant...

How the Supreme Court’s Deadlock Will Change Immigration Politics

Pratheepan Gulasekaram and Karthick Ramakrishnan, June 24, 2016 - "United States v. Texas also implicates a less-discussed, but critical, issue: the growing involvement of states in setting immigration policy. ... [U.S. v.] Texas represents a new moment in immigration federalism. While previous...

David Isaacson: An Eventful Thursday for Immigration Law at the Supreme Court: United States v. Texas, Mathis v. United States, and What’s Next

David Isaacson, June 28, 2016 - " On Thursday, June 23, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two decisions of significance to immigration law: a 4-4 affirmance without opinion in United States v. Texas , and a 5-3 decision in Mathis v. United States . The first, which was more obviously immigration-related...

Prof. Anil Kalhan on United States v. Texas: The Supreme Court’s Silent Endorsement of Trumpisprudence

Prof. Anil Kalhan, June 27, 2016 - " [B]y affirming the legally flawed and deeply politicized lower court decisions blocking the Obama administration’s immigration initiatives — the substance of which I have previously discussed in several essays for Dorf on Law ( here , here , and here...

MALDEF President Thomas A. Saenz Reflects on U.S. v. Texas

AILA, July 1, 2016 - "President and General Counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Foundation (MALDEF) Thomas A. Saenz, whose recent U.S. Supreme Court argument on behalf of immigrant mothers underscored the human impact of immigration policy, presented as the keynote speaker...

Feds Seek Full Court Rehearing in USA v. Texas

Amy Howe, July 18, 2016 - " The filing by Acting Solicitor General Ian Gershengorn acknowledged that it is “exceedingly rare” for the Court to agree to rehear a case. But, the Obama administration emphasized, the Court did precisely that in several cases dating back to the first part...

Justice Department Gave Supreme Court Incorrect Data in Immigration Case

Jess Bravin, Wall Street Journal, Aug. 30, 2016 - "The Justice Department said it provided the Supreme Court with erroneous information that helped it win a 2003 case upholding a blanket policy of denying bail to thousands of immigrants imprisoned while appealing deportation orders. The department...

Supreme Court Grants Cert. in Hernández v. Mesa

15-118 HERNANDEZ V. MESA DECISION BELOW: 785 F.3d 117 LOWER COURT CASE NUMBER: 12-50217 QUESTION PRESENTED: In Boumediene v. Bush, this Court held that the Constitution's extraterritorial application "turn[s] on objective factors and practical concerns," not a "formal sovereignty...

Cert. Granted in Esquivel-Quintana

Michael Carlin writes: "The Supreme Court granted cert in Esquivel-Quintana v. Lynch . I have been representing Mr. Esquivel-Quintana before the BIA and before the Sixth Circuit . Before the Supreme Court, I am working with Jeffrey Fisher (counsel of record) and others at Stanford's Supreme...

Preview of Supreme Court Oral Argument, Lynch v. Morales-Santana

SCOTUSblog - Whether Congress’s decision to impose a different physical-presence requirement on unwed citizen mothers of foreign-born children than on other citizen parents of foreign-born children through 8 U.S.C. 1401 and 1409 (1958) violates the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection;...

Transcript of Sup. Ct. Oral Argument: Lynch v. Morales-Santana

No. 15-1191, November 9, 2016 - The above-entitled matter came on for oral argument before the Supreme Court of the United States at 10:01 a.m.

SCOTUS Argument Preview: The Constitutionality of Immigrant Detention - Kevin Johnson

Kevin Johnson, Nov. 23, 2016 - "In recent years, the U.S government has aggressively used detention of immigrants as a tool for enforcing the immigration laws. Immigration detention became national news in 2014 when the Obama administration detained tens of thousands of Central American women and...

Links to All Briefs in Today's Supreme Court Oral Argument: Jennings v. Rodriguez

Jennings v. Rodriguez case file, SCOTUSblog

Transcript of Supreme Court Oral Argument: Jennings v. Rodriguez

Supreme Court, Nov. 30, 2016

S.C. Oral Argument Analysis: Immigrant Detention and the Constitution - Jennings v. Rodriguez

Kevin Johnson, Dec. 1, 2016 - "[T] he justices appeared deeply divided during oral argument in Jennings v. Rodriguez . This class-action challenge to immigration detentions raises questions about whether immigrants, like virtually any U.S. citizen placed in criminal or civil detention, must be guaranteed...

Supreme Court Orders Supplemental Briefing: Jennings v. Rodriguez

SCOTUS Order, Dec. 15, 2016 - "The parties are directed to file supplemental briefs addressing the following questions: 1) Whether the Constitution requires that aliens seeking admission to the United States who are subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b) must be afforded bond...

Supreme Court Grants Cert. in Immigration Case: Lee v. U.S.

Lee v. United States, No. 16-327, SCOTUSblog Issue: Whether it is always irrational for a noncitizen defendant with longtime legal resident status and extended familial and business ties to the United States to reject a plea offer notwithstanding strong evidence of guilt when the plea would result...

Supreme Court News (Tuesday, January 17, 2017) - Updated

Today, January 17, 2017, the SCOTUS hears oral argument in Lynch v. Dimaya , a case with "potentially far-reaching constitutional implications," according to Prof. Kevin Johnson . Here's a link to the transcript . Last Friday, January 13, 2017, the SCOTUS granted certiorari in Maslenjak...

Analysis of Lynch v. Dimaya Oral Argument: Prof. Kevin R. Johnson

Prof. Kevin R. Johnson, Jan. 18, 2017 - "[On January 17, 2017,] the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Lynch v. Dimaya , a criminal-removal case. The court has taken up several of these in recent years, including Esquivel-Quintana v. Lynch , which the justices will hear next month. Unlike some...

Legomsky and Yale-Loehr File Amicus Brief in Jennings v. Rodriguez

Cornell law Prof. Stephen W. Yale-Loehr writes: "Steve Legomsky and I signed the attached amicus brief in Jennings v. Rodriguez , the immigration detention bond case now pending before the Supreme Court. An excellent team at Ropes & Gray did a great job drafting the brief for us. It was obvious...