Arizona Dream Act Coalition v. Janice Brewer

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an injunction against enforcement of a likely unconstitutional state policy was prohibitory rather than mandatory
• holding that an injunction that prohibits the enforcement of a new law or policy is prohibitory, not mandatory, even where the policy has already taken effect prior to filing the lawsuit
• holding that “limiting [a plaintiff’s] professional opportunities” can constitute irreparable harm
• finding that Arizona’s policy of denying driver’s licenses to DACA recipients was not rationally related to any legitimate state purpose
• stating that “status quo” refers to status quo refers to the “legally relevant relationship between the parties before the controversy arose” (emphasis omitted)
• holding the loss of opportunity to pursue 16 one’s chosen profession, particularly early in life, may constitute irreparable injury

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).