U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen ruled in favor of nine conservative-led states, including Texas, blocking the Biden administration from accepting new DACA applicants – saying the program is not legal. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton hailed the ruling as a victory, announcing on Twitter that he had again defeated the Biden administration on illegal immigration. The Biden administration has pledged to protect DACA or put something similar in place. (A split 4-4 Supreme Court ruling in 2016 left the lower court's injunction in effect.) Immigration rights advocates are urging the Biden administration to protect undocumented immigrants by taking executive action in the face of a politically divided Congress.
Related:REASON - SCOTUS Revisits Gun Control
Two years later, in McDonald v. Chicago, the Court said states also are obligated to respect that right. What counts as "proper cause"? To the contrary, the Second Amendment exists to protect the rights of all the people." The most natural reading of this definition encompasses public carry…..I find it extremely improbable that the Framers understood the Second Amendment to protect little more than carrying a gun from the bedroom to the kitchen." If at least three other justices agree, this case could go down in the books as another landmark victory for Second Amendment advocates.THE HILL - Garland strikes down Trump-era immigration court rule, empowering judges to pause cases
The immigration court system, which is housed within the Department of Justice (DOJ), saw its backlog more than double under the Trump administration to 1.3 million as immigration officials forwarded a deluge of cases seeking deportation. Garland’s post gives him the power to review decisions made in the immigration court system, a power attorneys general used frequently under the Trump administration. The move followed pressure from immigration advocacy groups to review all of the 17 attorney general-level immigration court decisions made under the Trump administration. Greg Chen with the American Immigration Lawyers Association previously told The Hill that he estimates that some 460,000 people on the docket have applications for status pending with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services but are still being asked to make immigration court appearances roughly every three to six months.REASON - The Standing-Remedy Nexus in Texas v. United States – Reason.com
The Standing-Remedy Nexus in Texas v. United StatesThe new federal district court decision on immigration is getting lots of attention. A lacuna in the court's discussion of the injunction: the court never says why it is granting a national injunction. The standing analysis aptly shows how incompatible Massachusetts v. EPA is with Massachusetts v. Mellon. Yet this is a standard part of the Supreme Court's analysis for both Article III standing and equitable standing (see, e.g., Lyons). Sutherland's opinion for the Court is about the judicial power and traditional equity, not about a special status for statutes.SUN TIMES - Immigration groups ramp up efforts for legal help in anticipation of reform
Immigration groups across the country are ramping up legal assistance efforts in anticipation of legislation that would provide a pathway for legalization for undocumented immigrants. A coalition of immigration groups on Tuesday launched the “Ready to Stay” campaign, which includes a website where immigrants can search by Zip Code for legal help. Jaime Soto, from the Catholic Legal Immigration Network, said tax records will also provide a significant form of proof of living in the country if immigration reform happens. Democrats are hopeful immigration reform could be passed as part of the federal budget because it would be shielded from a Republican Senate filibuster, according to the Associated Press. Soto said advocates are hoping to build on the network that was started in the 1980s during the last major immigration reform.