Cather v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “extensive” history Case: 22-1249 Document: 71 Page: 24 Filed: 03/13/2023 24 APPLE INC. v. VIDAL supporting “future plans” can establish injury in fact
• holding that the Jibrils only lacked standing to challenge the Government’s allegedly unlawful pat-down searches of minors and the separation of minors from their families
• concluding that “extensive” history Case: 22-1249 Document: 71 Page: 24 Filed: 03/13/2023 24 APPLE INC. v. VIDAL supporting “future plans” can establish injury in fact
• concluding that “the prospective relief the Jibrils [sought], including revisions to the TRIP policies [as to the Selectee List], would ameliorate the alleged future harms with respect to which they complain”
• holding that Plaintiffs sufficiently pleaded substantial future harm based on allegations that they would “soon fly again and that they remain on a terrorist watchlist,” thus exposing them to an “an imminent risk of invasive and undue Government actions”
• inferring that the Jibrils remained on the Selectee List when they completed the DHS TRIP process and the government “provided no information to the contrary”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).