The upcoming U.S. Presidential election is presenting voters with a clear choice in not only style, but also in real policy differences. This is especially true in the area of immigration.
On Monday, May 16th, 2016, I had the honor of being present in the United States Supreme Court to be sworn in as a member of the U.S. Supreme Court Bar. While I was there, I had the unique opportunity of observing the courts deliver its decisions, including that of the case Husky International Electronics V. Ritz.
A Supreme Court ruling this past Thursday resulted in a rare 4-4 tie-a deadlock in a case that would have decided the status of over five million undocumented immigrants who are parents of citizens and/or lawful residents of the United States.
On April 18th, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the matter of Texas v. United States. This is the legal action in which Texas and 25 other states joined to challenge President Obama's executive order known as DAPA(Deferred Action for Parents of Americans). DAPA would stop the deportation of people in the U.S. without legal authorization and who arrived here prior to 2010, have no criminal convictions, and are parents of children who are either American citizens or permanent residents.
In November of 2014, after Congress refused to pass any immigration reform, President Obama issued an executive orderto help those that didn't have legal status in the United States and had children that were born in the U.S. The program was called Deferred Action for Parents of Americans, or DAPA.
Rabbi Martin Wolmark, 57, an orthodox rabbi from Monsey, New York has been sentenced to more than three years in prison for his part in a ring that used coercion and torture in order to get Jewish men to agree to a religions divorce.
Thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on June 26, 2015, in the matter of Obergefell v. Hodges, same sex couples now have the right to marry throughout the United States. Further, every state must also recognize the same sex marriages performed in other states.
On November 21, 2014, President Obama announced that he would be issuing an executive order that would defer the deportation of millions of people who do not have legal status to be in the United States.
For the last several years, those considering filing bankruptcy in New York who lived in either a rent-controlled or rent-stabilized apartment had to consider the possibility of losingtheir home if they filed bankruptcy. It seemed crazy that some of the most vulnerable among us risked becoming homeless by seeking the protection and benefits allowed under the bankruptcy laws; however, this was the law until a few days ago.
President Obama's executive order from November 2014 has just received another legal setback. A three judge panel from the Fifth Circuit in Texas v. United States voted 2 to 1 against the Obama Administration. This allows the injunction of a Texasdistrict court, which prevents the executive order going into effect remain in place.