Identical DHS and DOS media notes are here and here . Media coverage here , here , here , here , here and here . The intent is to curtail irregular migration through the Darién Gap . [I have...
Cyrus D. Mehta and Kaitlyn Box, July 1, 2024 "The conservative majority Supreme Court recently issued two decisions that will have a major impact on the administrative state by transferring power...
CISOMB, June 2024 "I am pleased to present the Office of the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman’s (CIS Ombudsman) 2024 Annual Report to Congress. This Report, submitted annually...
Gaby Del Valle, The Verge, June 28, 2024 "Chevron deference has given the Department of Homeland Security and its component agencies broad latitude. For example, under Chevron , decisions made by...
Prof. Nancy Morawetz said this on today's ImmigrationProf Blog : "In the aftermath of the Supreme Court’ decision in Loper Bright , you might think that everyone would agree that courts...
"In the last several years, state and local governments have passed laws that attempt to “get tough on undocumented migrants.” The Supreme Court recently addressed one of these measures in United States v. Arizona, and the Court may soon be considering another. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit will soon announces its en banc opinion in the case Villas at Parkside Partners v. City of Farmers Branch. The case concerns a law that directs the building inspector of Farmers Branch—a Dallas-Fort Worth suburb—to “‘verify with the federal government’ whether every noncitizen occupant of rental housing is ‘an alien lawfully present in the United States.’” If the building inspector finds that an occupant is not lawfully present, he or she must revoke that occupant’s “occupancy license,” which triggers potential criminal liability for both the occupant and the landlord. According to Professor Kit Johnson, the Farmers Branch law is an “unconstitutional usurpation of the federal government’s exclusive authority over immigration law and policy,” and she believes the Fifth Circuit should affirm the two opinions below that struck down the law under federal preemption doctrine. While Professor Peter J. Spiro agrees with Professor Johnson that the lawwill be struck down, he argues that “it is not clear that it should be.” According to Professor Spiro, the Supreme Court’s immigration preemption doctrine is outmoded, heavy-handed, and forbids states from “undertak[ing] broader experimentation with immigration federalism” that might ultimately benefit immigrants." - U. Penn. Law Review.