Spann, Robert Mark

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the district court did not \abuse[ ] its discretion in determining that the scope of the injunction should be nationwide\
• observing that “City recognized . . . maintenance of public order and safety required the cooperation of witnesses and victims, whether documented or not”
• noting that “[a] clause in a catch‐all provision at the end of a list of explicit powers would be an odd place indeed to put a sweeping power to impose any conditions on any grants”
• noting that “[a] clause in a catch‐all provision at the end of a list of explicit powers would be an odd place indeed to put a sweeping power to impose any conditions on any grants”
• finding that Chicago’s “Welcoming City Ordinance” did not interfere “in any way with the federal government’s lawful pursuit of its civil immigration activities” and did not “immunize anyone to the reach of the federal government”
• finding it noteworthy that \the City is obligated to apply for Byrne JAG funds not only for itself but for eleven neighboring localities.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).