If this decision is correct, it would indicate portions of the Convention Against Torture regulations promulgated by the Clinton administration violate due process.
I suspect the Supreme Court will not hold the Clinton administration's CAT procedures unconstitutional.
Have any of these courts explained how FRAP 25(a)(5) comports with this reading of the First Amendment? Surely the judiciary can't categorically deny online access to immigration filings if the public's right of access is this strong?
1 year after immigrating to the US, Keisy Guerrero Mariano committed a violent robbery. He spent 19 months in prison. DHS sought to deport him in 2019. On Friday, Kathy Hochul pardoned him, barring his deportation. Who benefits from letting violent criminals stay in the US?
The ACLU told SCOTUS today that Guerrero's pardon moots a case asking whether it is constitutional to detain criminals during their deportation proceedings. Despite Guerrero being in removal proceedings for almost 7 years, Hochul waited to pardon him until SCOTUS got involved.
NYT must have been sitting on this article for a while, because the Fifth Circuit sided with Judge O'Connor seven weeks ago. And the in-state tuition law was enacted in 2001, not 2011. Disappointing NYT is making editing mistakes AI can catch.
Even more remarkable is that California taxpayers are funding this Salvadoran murderer's legal defense so he can stay in the country. He is represented by the San Francisco Public Defender. How do Californians benefit by letting violent criminal aliens stay in the country?
The petitioner in this case murdered a child as part of a gang dispute with MS-13. It is remarkable that Perkins Coie and Akin Gump chose to file amicus briefs in this case so DHS would be forced to release him into the US and permit him to victimize more people.
It's strange that after the overruling of Humphrey's Executor, courts are still permitting executive branch agencies to file separate briefs in litigation. Seems like we don't yet have a unitary executive.
11th Circuit in 1986:
"We note at the outset that the district court has once again failed to recognize the structure of immigration policy in this country. The world is not entitled to enter the United States as a matter of right."
It is inexplicable that someone who immigrated to the United States 8 years ago has failed to learn a lick of English or become literate in any other language.
(From the federal government's first-ever request to the Alien Terrorist Removal Court).
Blue states make every effort to shut down immigration detention facilities within their jurisdictions and then courts get upset DHS moves people to TX and LA, where bed space is available.
Y.R. "asked to be identified by her initials out of fear that the Trump administration may retaliate against her," but her attorney is quoted by name. That was sufficient information to identify her in <5 minutes via PACER. These attorneys are prejudicing their clients.
NEW @TexasTribune with @ujohnnyg: ICE is arresting relatives who are willingly going through the vetting process to take custody of unaccompanied children, contributing to kids waiting for months in federal shelters. shorturl.at/69tYo
What kind of software confirms someone is not a citizen and then asks which party they want to register with?
Last week I learned that a serious software error in New Jersey’s Motor Vehicle System led to the registration of roughly 6,600 people who indicated that they were not U.S. citizens between June 2023 and June 2024, almost three years prior to my taking office. These individuals answered "no" when asked on a keypad whether they were a U.S. citizen when applying for drivers' licenses and identification cards, but through no fault of their own, the system registered them anyway.
This happened under the previous administration and, upon learning this information, I immediately ordered my chief counsel to launch an investigation to get to the bottom of what occurred. I also ordered the removal of any residents from our voter rolls who were erroneously added between June 2023 and June 2024. The new MVC Administrator that I appointed has begun the process of replacing the vendor responsible for administering the system.
Our preliminary analysis shows fewer than 400 individuals who were newly registered for the first time because of the error voted. They were registered as Democrats, Republicans and Unaffiliated voters and were scattered across the state.
I want to underscore how seriously I take this matter. As a military veteran who swore an oath to defend our Constitution, and as a former federal prosecutor, I believe the integrity of our elections is fundamental to our democracy. I am appalled by the reckless failures that allowed this to happen and the lack of transparency shown by those in charge at the time. This failure didn’t occur under my watch, but accountability starts now. I am taking action to prevent anything like it from occurring in the future and make sure those responsible are held accountable.
As the Trump Administration tries to weaponize elections for political gain, I am ensuring we protect our elections. Let me be clear: Donald Trump has zero credibility on the issue of election integrity. For more than ten years, he has worked to undermine Americans' faith in our elections by spreading lies about legitimate election results, attempting to overturn a free and fair election, encouraging an attack on our Capitol when he couldn't accept the will of the voters, and defunding election security at the federal level.
The difference is simple: when we find a problem, we don't hide it, deny it, or invent conspiracies. We investigate it, we fix it, and we tell the public. That's what accountability and good governance look like, and that's exactly what my administration is doing.
New Jerseyans should have confidence that every eligible citizen can vote, every lawful vote will be counted, and every reasonable step will be taken to protect the integrity of our elections. That's my responsibility, and it's one I will never stop fighting to uphold.
It's not "private" if the Eleventh Circuit's report contains sufficient detail to identify the judge.
A national judicial panel has upheld a private reprimand of a federal judge in the U.S. South who engaged in an extramarital affair with a high-ranking police officer and had sexual intercourse in the judge's chambers within earshot of staff. reuters.com/legal/government…



























