Most immigrants facing deportation are entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge, but their legal rights differ.
As June approaches, speculation about Supreme Court retirements intensifies. Justices’ strategic retirements can shape the Court’s future and legal landscape, driven by political motives. Proposals for term limits could curb this, ensuring impartial justice and restoring public trust in the Court’s integrity.
The Proud Boys are suing the U.S. for $100 million, led by a lawyer with ties to white nationalism and goat sacrifice.
The U.S. evacuated around 250 American citizens from Israel via flights to Athens, Rome, and Cyprus, a State Department official says.
Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo vetoed NV A.B. 105, blocking a ban on guns near election sites, despite 70% voter support. This decision leaves Nevadans exposed to potential intimidation at polling places, contrasting with states like Florida and Texas, which have enacted similar protections.
Texas mandates Ten Commandments in public school classrooms, sparking legal challenges over church-state separation concerns.
Posts with dramatic headlines and images fuel confusion, using tactics like false connection to mislead and provoke fear.
The Supreme Court revived lawsuits against Palestinian authorities for Americans harmed in Middle East terror attacks.
Roger Up helps veterans and first responders transition to civilian life by offering outdoor activities and support services.
This guidance empowers U.S. citizenship & immigration officers with significant discretion to deny various applications.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, under Trump’s directive, is considering abolishing FEMA, potentially reducing disaster aid. This move could reshape federal emergency response, impacting states’ abilities to manage crises independently. Critics warn it might leave many vulnerable during natural disasters like hurricanes or pandemics.
The Trump administration’s consideration of suspending habeas corpus, a crucial legal tool for contesting detentions, highlights ongoing tension between executive actions and constitutional rights, underscoring the writ’s historical significance as a safeguard against arbitrary government power since its inception in 1215’s Magna Carta.
