Search results
13 lis 2023 · On January 8, 2021, Texas and DHS executed an agreement recognizing the parties’ shared interest in immigration enforcement. 8 Specifically, the agreement required Texas to “provide information and assistance to help DHS perform its border security, legal immigration, immigration enforcement, and national security missions in exchange for ...
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.
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...
14 lip 2023 · In a recent 8-1 ruling in United States v. Texas , the Supreme Court held that Texas and Louisiana lacked standing to challenge the agency’s guidance to line-level personnel on how to direct their enforcement efforts.
30 cze 2023 · KEY SUMMARY FOR PRACTITIONERS • United States v. Texas held that Texas and Louisiana lacked standing to challenge the Executive Branch’s enforcement decisions on whether or not to arrest and prosecute individuals suspected of violating immigration laws. • The decision may have broader implications on states’ standing to challenge federal
United States v. Texas: Supreme Court holds that Texas and Louisiana lack Article III standing to challenge the Guidelines for the Enforcement of Civil Immigration Law.
5 paź 2022 · After the Supreme Court's decision in Regents, the States and the DACA Recipients filed cross-motions for summary judgment. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the States. It concluded that DACA violated the procedural and substantive requirements of the APA.
