Carr, Thomas Raymond

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that courts \may consider plaintiffs' extrinsic evidence\ as permitted by the applicable level of scrutiny
• concluding that the district court did not \abuse[ ] its discretion in determining that the scope of the injunction should be nationwide\
• holding that courts “may consider plaintiffs’ extrinsic evidence” as permitted by the applicable level of scrutiny
• concluding that the district court did not “abuse[] its discretion in determining that the scope of the injunction should be nationwide”
• concluding that the policy was based on a “legitimate national security interest” in part because of the existence of a waiver program
• holding that the immigrant family member plaintiffs’ claims of “prolonged separation from family members” constituted “indefinite delay” sufficient to satisfy irreparable harm to support preliminary injunction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).