Resources on Federal Court and Administrative Decisions

You may search for resources either by title or by month and year.

Last updated on

The U.S. Supreme Court held in Niz-Chavez v. Garland, 141 S. Ct. 1474 (2021), that a Notice to Appear, or NTA, must contain the time and place of the immigration court hearing in a single document in order to trigger the stop-time rule in cancellation of removal cases, and that a subsequently-issued hearing notice does not stop time if the NTA did not include the required information. The Niz-Chavez decision answered some, though by no means all, of the questions raised by the Supreme Court’s decision in Pereira v. Sessions, 138 S. Ct. 2105 (2018). This practice advisory discusses the Supreme Court’s decisions in Niz-Chavez and Pereira and provide strategies for practitioners to consider in cases where the client’s NTA was defective.

Last updated on

CLINIC, the Center for Gender and Refugee Studies, and Pangea Legal Services, have sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, calling on him to vacate three precedential decisions — Matter of A-B-, Matter of A-C-A-A-, and Matter of L-E-A- — that severely limit access to asylum for those fleeing domestic violence, gang violence and violence based on family membership. As counsel for the asylum seekers in these three cases, we ask that the decisions be set aside as the agencies work on issuing regulations that will address these issues, pursuant to President Biden's Feb. 2, 2021 executive order on asylum.

Last updated on

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, or DHS, has announced the termination of Temporary Protected Status, or TPS, designations for nationals of Sudan, Nicaragua, Haiti, El Salvador, Nepal and Honduras, and the termination of Deferred Enforced Departure, or DED, for Liberia. In the wake of these termination decisions, several different cases have been filed in U.S district courts.

Last updated on

Update: On June 28, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review three of the below legal challenges - Regents of the University of California v. DHS, Batalla Vidal v. Nielsen, and NAACP v. Trump. Oral arguments are scheduled for November 12, 2019.

Last updated on

Clients who sign applications for immigration benefits without fully understanding the details of what they are claiming could be putting their status at risk. Read more to learn about the BIA’s ruling on these types of cases.