Challenges

Supreme Court to Consider Federal Courts’ Role in Asylum Cases

by

On December 1, the Supreme Court will deliberate on the case of Urias-Orellana v. Bondi, focusing on the critical role of federal courts in asylum proceedings. This case raises significant questions about whether federal appellate courts should defer to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) when evaluating claims made by asylum seekers. The decision could have far-reaching implications for countless individuals seeking refuge from persecution. Background of the Case The legal challenge originates from the asylum application of Douglas Humberto Urias-Orellana, Sayra Iliana Gamez-Mejia, and their minor child, who fled El Salvador in 2021. They … Read more

SCOTUStoday for Tuesday, November 25

by

On November 25, 2020, the Supreme Court issued a late-night order that blocked the enforcement of New York’s attendance restrictions for houses of worship during the COVID-19 pandemic. This decision highlighted the Court’s ongoing engagement with issues surrounding religious freedoms and governmental regulations, particularly in the context of public health. As Thanksgiving approaches, it is pertinent to reflect on how the Court has historically interacted with the holiday’s significance and the broader implications for church-state relations. SCOTUS Quick Hits In the latest updates from the Supreme Court, several notable cases are currently under consideration, including … Read more

Challengers to Texas Redistricting Map Urge Justices to Strike It as Racially Discriminatory

by

Civil rights groups and various Texans are currently challenging the new congressional map adopted by the Texas Legislature in August. These challengers have petitioned the Supreme Court to reinstate a ruling from a three-judge district court that prohibited the state from implementing this map in the upcoming 2026 elections. The Mexican American Legislative Caucus, one of the primary challengers, argues that the state engaged in racial redistricting in a manner that violates the Constitution’s equal protection clause, which mandates that laws be applied fairly and without discrimination. Background of the Redistricting Controversy The controversy surrounding … Read more

Challengers to Texas Redistricting Map Urge Justices to Strike It as Racially Discriminatory

by

Civil rights groups and various Texans are contesting the new congressional map adopted by the Texas Legislature in August, arguing that it violates the principles of racial equality and fair representation. The challengers, including the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, have urged the Supreme Court to restore a prior ruling by a three-judge district court that prohibited the state from implementing the map for the upcoming 2026 elections. This legal battle underscores the ongoing tensions surrounding redistricting practices and their implications for minority representation in Texas. Background on the Redistricting Controversy The controversy began when former … Read more