State of TEXAS; State of Louisiana, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
UNITED STATES of America; Alejandro Mayorkas, Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; United States Department of Homeland Security; Troy Miller, Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, in His Official Capacity; United States Customs and Border Protection; Tae D. Johnson, Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, in His Official Capacity; United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Tracy Renaud, Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, in Her Official Capacity; U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Defendants-Appellants.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
FILED July 6, 2022.
FILED July 6, 2022.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Benjamin D. Wilson , Judd Edward Stone, II , Office of the Attorney General of Texas, Office of the Solicitor General, Austin, TX, Eric Alan Hudson , Assistant Attorney General, Terrazas, P.L.L.C., Austin, TX, Patrick K. Sweeten , Office of the Attorney General of Texas, Special Counsel State of Texas Unit, Austin, TX, Ryan Daniel Walters , Attorney, Texas Public Policy Foundation, Austin, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee State of Texas.
Benjamin D. Wilson , Judd Edward Stone, II , Office of the Attorney General of Texas, Office of the Solicitor General, Austin, TX, Elizabeth Baker Murrill, Esq. , Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General for the State of Louisiana, Baton Rouge, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee State of Louisiana.
Sean Janda , Michael Shih , U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Appellate Section, Washington, DC, Daniel David Hu , Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney's Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, Adam David Kirschner , U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division Federal Programs Branch, Washington, DC, Erez Reuveni , Assistant Director, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, Washington, DC, Daniel Bentele Hahs Tenny, Esq. , U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Washington, DC, for Defendant-Appellant United States of America.
Sean Janda , Michael Shih , U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Appellate Section, Washington, DC, Daniel David Hu , Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney's Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, Adam David Kirschner , U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division Federal Programs Branch, Washington, DC, Daniel Bentele Hahs Tenny, Esq. , U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Washington, DC, for Defendants-Appellants Alejandro Mayorkas, Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, United States Department of Homeland Security, Troy Miller, Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, in his official capacity, United States Customs and Border Protection, Tae D. Johnson, Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, in his official capacity, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Tracy Renaud, Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, in her official capacity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
Drew C. Ensign , Deputy Solicitor General, Attorney General's Office for the State of Arizona, Phoenix, AZ, for Amici Curiae State of Arizona, State of Alabama, State of Florida, State of Georgia, State of Indiana, State of Kansas, State of Kentucky, State of Mississippi, State of Missouri, State of Montana, State of Nebraska, State of Ohio, State of Oklahoma, State of South Carolina, State of West Virginia, State of Wyoming, State of Arkansas.
Matt A. Crapo , Immigration Reform Law Institute, Washington, DC, for Amicus Curiae Immigration Reform Law Institute.
Before Jones, Clement, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:
Before the court is the Department of Homeland Security's ("DHS") request to stay the district court's vacatur of a new immigration rule that radically reduces the federal government's detention of those who are statutorily required to be removed post-haste. The district court determined that the rule conflicts with federal statutes, is arbitrary...
Let's get started
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.
