Yahoo Poland Wyszukiwanie w Internecie

Search results

  1. 29 lis 2022 · 81 decision for United States majority opinion by Brett M. Kavanaugh. Texas and Louisiana lack Article III standing to challenge immigration-enforcement guidelines promulgated by the Secretary of Homeland Security that prioritize the arrest and removal of certain noncitizens from the United States.

  2. 29 lis 2022 · Holding: Texas and Louisiana lack Article III standing to challenge immigration-enforcement guidelines promulgated by the Secretary of Homeland Security that prioritize the arrest and removal of certain noncitizens from the United States. Judgment: Reversed, 8-1, in an opinion by Justice Kavanaugh on June 23, 2023.

  3. 13 lis 2023 · On January 22, 2021, Texas sued the United States and Acting Secretary Pekoske in the Southern District of Texas. 14 Arguing the new guidelines violated its agreement with DHS, Texas carefully grounded its claim in “budgetary harms, including higher education and healthcare costs.” 15 Based on these alleged costs, the district court ...

  4. 18 kwi 2016 · Issue: (1) Whether a state that voluntarily provides a subsidy to all aliens with deferred action has Article III standing and a justiciable cause of action under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to challenge the Secretary of Homeland Security’s guidance seeking to establish a process for considering deferred action for certain aliens beca...

  5. 19 mar 2024 · United States v. Texas, 599 U. S. 670, 679 (2023). In sum, the District Court concluded that S. B. 4 was both likely unconstitutional and would cause immediate turmoil, and denied Texas’s request for permission to enforce the law nonetheless while appealing the preliminary injunc-tion.

  6. Texas and other states sued to prevent the implementation of DAPA and argued that it violated the Administrative Procedure Act because it had not gone through the notice-and-comment process, and because it was arbitrary and capricious.

  7. The States of Texas and Louisiana claim that the Guide-lines contravene two federal statutes that they read to require the ar-rest of certain noncitizens upon their release from prison (8 U. S. C. §1226(c)) or entry of a final order of removal (§1231(a)(2)).

  1. Ludzie szukają również