Holding: The Department of Homeland Security’s decision to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program was arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act.
You May Also Like
United States v. Vaello-Madero
legaladmin
Holding: The Constitution does not require Congress to extend Supplemental Security Income benefits to residents of Puerto Rico. Judgment: Reversed, 8-1, in an opinion by Justice Kavanaugh on April 21, 2022.…
United States v. Tsarnaev
Holding: The judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit vacating Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s capital sentences is reversed. Judgment: Reversed, 6-3, in an opinion by Justice Thomas on March…
Gallardo v. Marstiller
Holding: The Medicaid Act permits a state to seek reimbursement from settlement payments allocated for future medical care. Judgment: Affirmed, 7-2, in an opinion by Justice Thomas on June 6, 2022.…
Trump v. NAACP
Holding: The Department of Homeland Security’s decision to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program was arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act.
Ritzen Group Inc. v. Jackson Masonry, LLC
Holding: A bankruptcy court’s order unreservedly denying relief from the automatic stay constitutes a final, immediately appealable order under 28 U.S.C. § 158(a).
County of Maui, Hawaii v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund
Holding: The Clean Water Act, which forbids “any addition” of any pollutant from “any point source” to “navigable waters” without the appropriate Environmental Protection Agency permit, requires a permit when…
