Golding v. Petit

How courts have described this case

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

• ruling that DHS’s unwritten “immigration deterrence” policy constituted “final agency action” for purposes of APA review
• concluding that plaintiffs alleged a policy by pointing to both data showing significant decrease in parole release rate of asylum seekers and to specific “rejections of Plaintiffs’ parole requests—purportedly upon consideration of an improper factor”
• concluding that due process does not entitle asylum-seekers to individual hearings
• stating that \arriving aliens\ are \considered under the law to have never entered the United States\ even if they are physically present within United States borders
• recognizing an Accardi claim related to a policy that “establishe[d] procedural rights for asylum seekers in connection with the parole process”
• concluding upon review of the record that “Plaintiffs’ evidence of an unwritten . . . policy . . . outweigh[ed] Defendants’ self-serving declaration to the contrary.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).