Based on public reporting, President Joe Biden has identified a shortlist of highly credentialed and exceptionally well-qualified Black women – Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, Justice Leondra Kruger, and Judge J. Michelle Childs – to serve on the United States Supreme Court following Justice Stephen Breyer’s retirement. With distinguished service in private practice, public service, and on the bench, each of these women would bring a wealth of diverse experience to the Court.
As President Biden evaluates each candidate, he will assess how her past writings and decisions clarify her judicial philosophy, and how that philosophy might inform her rulings if confirmed.
Given the increasing frequency with which federal courts are called upon to resolve questions of immigration law and immigrants’ rights, it is in the immigrant justice movement’s interest to do the same.
This is especially true since Congress has functionally abdicated its traditional role in immigration policy through inertia and inaction. Presidential administrations of both parties increasingly rely on executive action to advance their immigration priorities, and disputes over the legality of their actions often wind up in court. At the state level, Republican officials have either implemented policies that harm immigrant communities or filed suit against pro-immigrant policies. Inevitably, these challenges make their way to our federal courts – and often all the way to the Supreme Court.
Immigrant justice advocates understand the impact Supreme Court decisions have firsthand – from positive rulings on DACA and the census to negative decisions on the Muslim Ban and Remain in Mexico. And while this nominee will not alter the current balance of the Supreme Court, she will have a hand in shaping the law around immigrants’ rights for decades to come.
At this crucial moment, the National Immigration Law Center has carefully researched and analyzed each potential nominee’s past rulings in immigration-related cases.
Read MoreThe Orantes Injunction: Protections for Detained Salvadorans After a Worksite Raid
Sep 12, 2024 Information for attorneys and legal workers representing persons detained in immigration worksite raids (or in any enforcement action) about the Orantes' permanent injunction.
Frequently Asked Questions: The Orantes Injunction
Sep 1, 2024 The Orantes injunction is a nationwide, permanent injunction requiring DHS to uphold certain rights of Salvadoran nationals in asylum proceedings. Originally published in November...
Padres Unidos de Tulsa v. Drummond
Case challenging the constitutionality of Oklahoma’s HB 4156, a law which seeks to usurp federal authority to regulate immigration.
Last update: Aug 29, 2024
LUPE v. TEXAS
Case challenging the constitutionality of Texas’ S.B. 4, a law which seeks to usurp federal authority to regulate immigration.
Last update: Aug 29, 2024