8/22: The latest claims against the Trump administration over its enforcement of the “public charge” provision in federal immigration law are nonsensical.
4/12: Just another example of a single federal district court judge going far beyond the bounds of his authority and interfering with the president’s ability to deal with a national security and humanitarian crisis.
1/19: On January 19, the Supreme Court granted review in this blockbuster case.
1/19: ACRU General Counsel Ken Klukowski speaks on the Larry O'Connor Show about Supreme Court taking up the arguments on Donald Trump's Immigration Travel Ban.
President Donald Trump’s new immigration policy is partially back in force as of late Monday, but only until the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit can decide the case’s merits.
There seems to be some debate over the extent of the victory that the Trump administration won on Monday when the Supreme Court stayed (or lifted) almost all of the injunctions issued against his revised executive order.
The lower courts had misapplied the First Amendment and interfered with the president’s constitutional executive power.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit took the extremely rare step of ordering that the constitutional challenge to President Donald Trump’s immigration travel order would be heard by all 15 judges.
It is unlikely that the Trump administration will petition the Supreme Court to review this particular decision, which concerned only the first policy, Executive Order 13769.
An explanation from five good federal judges.