Cases

FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 31 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS JOHN DOE #1, et al., No. 19-36020 Plaintiffs-Appellees, D.C. No. 3:19-cv-1743-SI v.

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JOHN DOE #1; JUAN RAMON No. 19-36020 MORALES; JANE DOE, # 2; IRIS ANGELINA CASTRO; BLAKE DOE; D.C. No. BRENDA VILLARRUEL; LATINO 3:19-cv-01743-SI NETWORK; JANE DOE, # 3; GABINO SORIANO CASTELLANOS, Plaintiffs-Appellees, ORDER v. DONALD J. TRUMP, in his official capacity as President of the United States;

FILED FOR PUBLICATION DEC 20 2019 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JOHN DOE #1; et al.,

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JOHN DOE #1; JUAN RAMON No. 19-36020 MORALES; JANE DOE, # 2; IRIS ANGELINA CASTRO; BLAKE DOE; D.C. No. BRENDA VILLARRUEL; LATINO 3:19-cv-01743-SI NETWORK; JANE DOE, # 3; GABINO SORIANO CASTELLANOS, Plaintiffs-Appellees, ORDER v. DONALD J. TRUMP, in his official capacity as President of the United States; U

FILED FOR PUBLICATION DEC 20 2019 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JOHN DOE #1; et al.,

JAMES L. ROBART, United States District Judge *1175I. INTRODUCTION Before the court is Defendants Donald Trump, United States Department of State, Rex Tillerson, United States Department of Homeland Security ("DHS"), United States Customs and Border Protection, Kevin McAleenan, Michele James, Office of the Director of Natio

JAMES L. ROBART, United States District Judge I. INTRODUCTION The work of this court, and more broadly of the federal Judiciary, is to resolve disputes between parties; that is what the court endeavors to do today in ruling on the two motions before it. Plaintiffs in both cases are refugees, who find themselves in dire circumstances, their family members who yearn to be reunited with them, and hum

JAMES L. ROBART, United States District Judge I. INTRODUCTION Before the court is Defendants Donald Trump, United States Department of State, Rex Tillerson, United States Department of Homeland Security, United States Customs and Border Protection, Kevin McAleenan, Michael James, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Elaine Duke, and Daniel Coats's (collectively, "Defendants") motion fo

JAMES L. ROBART, United States District Judge I. INTRODUCTION Before the court are two motions: (1) Consolidated Plaintiffs Jewish Family Services of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, John Does 1-3 and 7, and Jane Does 4-6's (collectively, "JFS Plaintiffs") motion to reinstate their request for limited discovery1 (2

Trump v Trump (2025 NY Slip Op 25118) [*1] Trump v Trump 2025 NY Slip Op 25118 Decided on May 20, 2025 Supreme Court, New York County Reed, J. Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to J

Trump v Trump (2025 NY Slip Op 25118) [*1] Trump v Trump 2025 NY Slip Op 25118 Decided on May 20, 2025 Supreme Court, New York County Reed, J. Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to J

OPINION PER CURIAM: For the third time, we are called upon to assess the legality of the President’s efforts to bar over 150 million nationals of six designated countries 1 from entering the United States or being issued immigrant visas that they w

OPINION 1 PER CURIAM: We are asked to delineate the statutory and constitutional limits to the President’s power to control immigration in this appeal of the district court’s order preliminarily enjoining two sections of Executive Order 13780 (“E02” or “the Order”), “Protecting the Nation From Fore

TRAXLER, Circuit Judge, dissenting: I agree with my dissenting colleagues insofar as they hold that the plaintiffs lack standing to assert their claims under the Immigration and Nationality Act. Accordingly, I do not reach the merits of those claims. With regard to the plaintiffs' claim that Proclamation No. 9,645 likely violates the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution, I believe they have sta

Case: 18-20440 Document: 00515603503 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/15/2020 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED October

A. Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Order 1. Standard of Review Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a), a district court "must consider timely objections" to a USMJ's order on nondispositive, pretrial matters and "modify or set aside any part of the order that is clearly erroneous or is contrary to law." "The 'clearly erroneous' standard applies to factu

In light of the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. Hawaii , --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 2392, --- L.Ed.2d ---- (2018), we remand this case to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court's opinion.

An appropriate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER Derrick K. Watson, United States District Judge INTRODUCTION Professional athletes mirror the federal government in this respect: they operate within a set of rules, and when one among them forsakes those rules in favor of his own, problems ensue. And so it goes wi

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued January 9, 2024 Decided February 6, 2024 No. 23-3228 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE v. DONALD J. TRUMP, APPELLANT Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (No. 1:23-cr-00257-