Peter Margulies is a professor at Roger Williams University School of Law, where he teaches Immigration Law, National Security Law and Professional Responsibility. He is the author of Law’s Detour: Justice Displaced in the Bush Administration (New York: NYU Press, 2010).
Subscribe to this Lawfare contributor via RSS.
As in the 2019 census case, Chief Justice John Roberts was not convinced by the administration’s justification for the policy change.
In a ruling on May 4, the Ninth Circuit denied the government's request for a stay of a nationwide preliminary injunction against a presidential proclamation barring admission of immigrants without "approved" health insurance. What’s in the opinion?
While the proclamation cites the impact of the novel coronavirus on U.S. jobs, the visa categories affected by the suspension have only a minimal effect on employment of citizens or lawful permanent residents.
On Feb. 28, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit cast doubt on the legality of the “Remain in Mexico” program and a rule limiting access to asylum.
What should we make of the Department of Justice Inspector General’s analysis of the FBI’s role in preparing FISA requests?
In October, President Trump issued a proclamation denying entry into the U.S. for otherwise qualified visa applicants unless they are likely to receive “approved health insurance” within 30 days of entry or can pay for their health care. A District Court just issued an injunction against the ban.
In a new rule, DHS authorizes removal of asylum seekers at the southern border of the U.S. to Guatemala, Honduras or El Salvador for asylum processing in those countries, as long as the removed individuals are not nationals of the particular country that will receive them.