Federal Courts/Jurisdiction

What role do immigrants play in American business and the American workforce? Immigrants work in a range of skilled positions in the U.S. and start businesses that boost the American economy. Learn more about immigrant entrepreneurship and workforce participation.

Recent Features

All Federal Courts/Jurisdiction Content

September 25, 2014

Washington, D.C.—Wednesday, the U.S.

September 17, 2014

Washington, D.C.

June 5, 2014

Washington, D.C.The American Immigration Council welcomes last week’s ruling by the United States District Court for the

May 22, 2014

On May 19, 2014, the American Immigration Council and the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) filed an amicus curiae brief urging the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit to

January 21, 2014
This Practice Advisory provides background information about requesting stays of removal from the court of appeals, discusses the legal standard for obtaining a stay, and addresses the implications of the government’s policy with respect to return of individuals who are successful on their appeal.
January 21, 2014
The American Immigration Council and National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild (NIPNLG) are seeking to preserve federal court review of damages actions brought by noncitizens for abuse of authority by immigration agents.
December 22, 2013

Washington, D.C.—The American Immigration Council welcomes today’s ruling from U.S. District Judge Richard M.

November 6, 2013

Washington, D.C.—This week, the American Immigration Council filed an amicus curiae

October 23, 2013
Section 336(b) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b), gives a district court jurisdiction to intervene in a case where USCIS has failed to make a decision on the naturalization application within 120 days of the applicant’s “examination” by USCIS. This Practice Advisory discusses the nuts and bolts of bringing a suit under INA § 336(b). It also discusses when attorneys fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act are available.
October 4, 2013
The Council, along with the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild (NIPNLG), is seeking to preserve federal court review of damages actions brought by noncitizens for abuse of authority by immigration agents. In actions brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), the government routinely moves to dismiss these cases on a variety of jurisdictional grounds, including by arguing that INA § 242(g) bars the court’s review of damages claims in any case involving removal procedures, and that a remedy under Bivens is not available in immigration-related actions. In essence, the government is attempting to deprive those who have been harmed by immigration agents of any remedy in federal court.

Most Read

  • Publications
  • Blog Posts
  • Past:
  • Trending