LexisNexis® Legal Newsroom
On Monday, Will Texas Be Able to Stand and Deliver?

The technical issue of 'standing' is at the heart of USA v. Texas , to be heard by the Supreme Court on Monday, April 18, 2016. Prof. Martin Lederman offers his thoughts on standing here . Prof. Amanda Frost offers her thoughts on standing here . Admiral Adama is skeptical:

Transcript of USA v. Texas Supreme Court Oral Argument Will Be Posted Here Monday Evening

Your editor will be on the road most of Monday and unable to blog until the evening. For fastest access to the transcript, refresh this link after the oral argument. Dara Lind at Vox.com has a good 'explainer' about the case here .

Transcript of USA v. Texas Supreme Court Oral Argument, Apr. 18, 2016

Transcript of USA v. Texas Supreme Court Oral Argument, Apr. 18, 2016

Reaction to USA v. Texas Supreme Court Oral Argument

Tuesday, Apr. 19, 2016, Yosemite National Park* Professors, practitioners, bloggers and reporters are reacting to yesterday's Supreme Court oral argument. (Transcript here .) A sample: Will Chief Justice Roberts Give the Administration a Win on Standing? Analysis by Dean Kevin Johnson...

Supreme Court Slaps Fifth Circuit on Immigrant Sentencing: Molina-Martinez v. U.S.

Molina-Martinez v. U.S., Apr. 20, 2016 - "The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit stands generally apart from other Courts of Appeals with respect to its consideration of unpreserved Guidelines errors. This Court now holds that its approach is incorrect."

David Isaacson on U.S. v. Texas

David Isaacson, Apr. 19, 2016 - ""While the discussion at oral argument of employment authorization separate from lawful status did not go so far as to address this issue of employment authorization for those subject to orders of removal, it did seem that the Solicitor General’s emphasis...

Prof. Anil Kalhan on U.S. v. Texas

Prof. Anil Kalhan (Drexel University, Thomas R. Kline School of Law), has written two fascinating and important pieces on the immigration case now pending at the Supreme Court: Ending Judicial Truthiness on Immigration - "When the Supreme Court considers what it hears this week in United States...

The Supreme Court Immigration Case You Never Heard Of: Mathis v. U.S.

Apr. 26, 2016 - Oral argument was heard today in Mathis v. U.S. The transcript is here . Links to all the briefs here . Argument preview here . Nutshell : " On Tuesday, April 26, the United States Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Mathis v. United States , likely to be the Term’s...

U.S. v. Texas Immigration Case May Turn On Procedural Grounds: MPI Policy Beat

Muzaffar Chishti, Faye Hipsman, and Isabel Ball , Apr. 26, 2016 - "The palpably intense oral argument in the case, U.S. v. Texas, focused chiefly on two issues: the standing of Texas and 25 other states to legally challenge the executive actions announced by President Obama in November 2014 and...

Montana Supreme Court Strikes Down Anti-Immigrant Law: MIJA v. Bullock (May 10, 2016)

MIJA writes: " The Montana Supreme Court has just issued a unanimous decision striking down the entirety of Montana's anti-immigrant law, which was placed on the 2012 ballot by the Montana legislature and approved by 80% of voters. The law, known as LR-121, would have denied a wide variety of...

Supreme Court, 5-3, Rules Against Immigrant - Luna Torres v. Lynch

Luna Torres v. Lynch, May 19, 2016 - KAGAN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and KENNEDY, GINSBURG, and ALITO, JJ., joined. SOTOMAYOR, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which THOMAS and BREYER, JJ., joined. Opinion : "We have little doubt that “Congress...

Sup. Ct. Cert. Pet. Asks: Who Determines Birth on U.S. Soil? - Sanchez v. Kerry

Sanchez v. Kerry, No. 15-1395, filed May 12, 2016 - "From the foundation of this country, it has been the States, and not the federal government, who determine which individuals are born within their boundaries. The Constitution does not allow the State Department or a federal court to ignore decisions...

News Excerpts From the June 1, 2016, Bender’s Immigration Bulletin

Supreme Court Decides Luna Torres v. Lynch | On May 19, The Supreme Court decided Torres v. Lynch , 578 U.S. ___ (2016). Justice Kagan delivered the opinion, joined by Justices Kennedy, Ginsburg, and Alito, and Chief Justice Roberts. Justice Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion joined by Justices...

LexisNexis Expert Author Stephen W. Yale-Loehr: Future for DACA Recipients 'Perilous'

Amy Frykholm, June 6, 2016 - "[T]he future of DACA is threatened. Stephen Yale-Loehr , professor of immigration studies at Cornell University, says that a court decision against the expansion of DACA (or one that reverts to the lower court’s decision on the question) is not good news for the...

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...