Martinez v. Regents of University of California

How courts have described this case

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

• finding a statute passed by the State Legislature that qualified unlawful aliens for in-state college tuition complied with 8 U.S.C. § 1621(d)’s requirements
• analyzing, with regal’d to PRWORA, a state statute exempting certain unauthorized aliens from paying out-of-state tuition
• analyzing, with regard to PRWORA, a state statute exempting certain unauthorized aliens from paying out-of-state tuition
• finding no implied conflict preemption or field preemption for California benefits law in light of Congress’s express permission for states to extend benefits in section 1621(d)
• noting that terms such as “ ‘illegal alien’ ” may be pejorative to some, who prefer the term “ ‘undocumented immigrant,’ ” but using the term “unlawful alien” in order to remain “neutral, yet as accurate, as possible,” with regard to the statutory language
• examining whether a statute passed by the California Legislature met the requirements of 8 U.S.C. § 1621(d), which permits a state to make unlawful aliens eligible for public benefits otherwise prohibited by 8 U.S.C. § 1621

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).