Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A U.S. judge in North Dakota has blocked the Biden administration from requiring 19 Republican-led states to provide health insurance coverage to immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally as children.
In 2016, the Supreme Court deadlocked 4-4 over an expanded DACA and a version of the program for parents of DACA recipients. In 2020, the high court ruled 5-4 that the Trump administration ...
These DACA-eligible people had submitted the necessary paperwork and paid the required $495 fee to apply for the program shortly before the federal judge in Texas closed the program for new ...
State of New York, et al. v. Trump et al. (No. 1:17-cv-05228-NGG-JO) is an ongoing [citation needed] lawsuit against the rescission implemented by the Trump administration of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. [1]
In another multi-state lawsuit, another federal judge ruled that a Biden administration attempt to provide DACA recipients with free healthcare funded by taxpayers was illegal, The Center Square ...
Over the course of the litigation around DACA, the Supreme Court in several other cases has signaled that lower courts should be wary of nationwide injunctions. This story has been updated with ...
Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, 591 U.S. 1 (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held by a 5–4 vote that a 2017 U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) order to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) immigration program was "arbitrary and capricious" under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and ...
A federal judge in Texas again ruled the DACA program for young immigrants raised in the U.S. is illegal but the program hasn't ended. Here are 4 things to know.