Palepu, S. v. Bondi, R.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “even a small reduction” in government funds to a private organization is a cognizable injury
• recognizing these criticisms of Havens-based organizational standing but also recognizing that three-judge panels of our court may not depart from prior precedent
• explaining that Congress has \established 'admission' as the key concept in immigration law\
• over- haul that included “developing new training materials” and “significant training of existing staff” in response to change in law was sufficient for standing
• over- haul that included “developing new training materials” and “significant training of existing staff” in response to change in law was sufficient for standing
• \The courts have 'long recognized' questions of immigration policy as 'more appropriate to either the Legislature or the Executive than to the Judiciary.' \ (quoting Mathews , 426 U.S. at 81 , 96 S.Ct. 1883 )

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).