Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Abudu, 485 U.S. 94 (1988), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court shifted the balance toward adjudications made by the INS and away from those made by the federal courts of appeals when aliens who had been ordered deported seek to present new evidence in order to avoid deportation.
The Attorney General may cancel removal in the case of an alien who is inadmissible or deportable . . . if the alien—(1) has been an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence for not less than 5 years, (2) has resided in the United States continuously for 7 years after having been admitted in any status, and (3) has not been convicted ...
Withdrawal of application for admission is an option that U.S. Department of Homeland Security might offer to an Arriving Alien whereby the alien chooses to withdraw his or her application to enter the United States, and immediately departs the United States (or pre-clearance port of entry).
Al-Kateb v Godwin, [2] was a decision of the High Court of Australia, which ruled on 6 August 2004 that the indefinite detention of a stateless person was lawful. The case concerned Ahmed Al-Kateb, a Palestinian man born in Kuwait, who moved to Australia in 2000 and applied for a temporary protection visa.
After his non-immigrant student visa expired in 1972, none of the three countries would accept him onto their territory, rendering him de facto stateless. [2] The INS initiated deportation proceedings against Chadha. Chadha sought to suspend his deportation, and the INS accommodated his request according to § 244(a)(1), and transmitted a ...
In February 2019, U.S. District Court Judge Margo K. Brodie approved a settlement in the case that amounted to $5.54 billion. [1] After four more years of litigation, in March 2023, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the District Court’s final approval order, with a modification reducing service awards, and allowing the ...
Among the categories of parole are port-of-entry parole, humanitarian parole, parole in place, removal-related parole, and advance parole (typically requested by persons inside the United States who need to travel outside the U.S. without abandoning status, such as applicants for LPR status, holders of and applicants for TPS, and individuals with other forms of parole).
Case name Docket no. Date decided Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California: 18–587: June 18, 2020: Liu v. Securities and Exchange Commission: 18–1501: June 22, 2020: Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam: 19–161: June 25, 2020: Seila Law v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: 19–7: June 29 ...