REGENTS OF UNIV. v. U.S. DEPT. OF HOMELAND SEC.

No. 18-15068, No. 18-15069, No. 18-15070, No. 18-15071, No. 18-15072, No. 18-15128, No. 18-15133, No. 18-15134.

966 F.3d 1036 (2020)

REGENTS OF the UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA; Janet Napolitano, in her official capacity as President of the University of California, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Defendants-Appellants. State of California; State of Maine; State of Minnesota; State of Maryland, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security; United States of America, Defendants-Appellants. City of San Jose, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, in his official capacity; Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security; United States of America, Defendants-Appellants. Dulce Garcia; Miriam Gonzalez Avila; Saul Jimenez Suarez; Viridiana Chabolla Mendoza; Jirayut Latthivongskorn; Norma Ramirez, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. United States of America; Donald J. Trump, in his official capacity as President of the United States; U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Defendants-Appellants. County of Santa Clara; Service Employees International Union Local 521, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Donald J. Trump, in his official capacity as President of the United States; William P. Barr, Attorney General; Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security; U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Defendants-Appellants. Regents of the University of California; Janet Napolitano, In her official capacity as President of the University of California; State of California; State of Maine; State of Minnesota; State of Maryland; City of San Jose; Dulce Garcia; Miriam Gonzalez Avila; Saul Jimenez Suarez; Viridiana Chabolla Mendoza; Jirayut Latthivongskorn; Norma Ramirez; County of Santa Clara; Service Employees International Union Local 521, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. United States of America; Donald J. Trump, in his official capacity as President of the United States; U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Defendants-Appellants. Regents of the University of California; Janet Napolitano, in her official capacity as President of the University of California; State of California; State of Maine; State of Minnesota; State of Maryland; City of San Jose; Dulce Garcia; Miriam Gonzalez Avila; Saul Jimenez Suarez; Viridiana Chabolla Mendoza; Jirayut Latthivongskorn; Norma Ramirez, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. United States of America; Donald J. Trump, in his official capacity as President of the United States; U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Defendants-Appellees. Dulce Garcia; Miriam Gonzalez Avila; Saul Jimenez Suarez; Viridiana Chabolla Mendoza; Norma Ramirez; Jirayut Latthivongskorn; County of Santa Clara; Service Employees International Union Local 521, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. United States of America; Donald J. Trump, in his official capacity as President of the United States; U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Defendants-Appellees.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Filed August 4, 2020.


ORDER

In light of the Supreme Court's decision in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, ___ U.S. ___, 140 S.Ct. 1891, 207 L.Ed.2d 353 (2020), we remand these cases to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court's opinion, which held that the Department of Homeland Security's rescission of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program "was arbitrary and capricious in violation of the...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases