Every decision we've summarized from United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
The Ninth Circuit denied Marlon Alonzo Smith's petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order denying Convention Against Torture relief and finding him removable. The court held that Smith failed to preserve his challenges to the authenticity of key government documents and found substantial evidence supported the denial of CAT protection.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed a preliminary injunction requiring Oregon to provide counsel to indigent criminal defendants within seven days of their initial appearance or release them from custody. The court held that the systemic failure to provide counsel constitutes an extraordinary circumstance that overrides the Younger abstention doctrine and justifies federal intervention to protect Sixth Amendment rights.
The Ninth Circuit held that a longshoreman with unilateral hearing loss and bilateral tinnitus is entitled to compensation under the statutory rate for one ear, not the higher rate for bilateral hearing loss. The court also ruled that the Benefits Review Board's remand order was final and appealable because only a ministerial act remained for the Administrative Law Judge to complete.
The Ninth Circuit enforced the National Labor Relations Board's order requiring Starbucks to bargain with Workers United, rejecting the company's arguments regarding election procedures and court jurisdiction. The panel held that the Regional Director properly ordered a mail-ballot election during the pandemic and that the Board's order was final and reviewable despite severing a potential compensatory remedy.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed a preliminary injunction banning wolf trapping in Montana during grizzly bear denning season but vacated the order's geographic scope and prohibition on research trapping. The court held that while plaintiffs raised serious questions regarding unlawful grizzly bear take under the Endangered Species Act, the district court's injunction was overbroad in its application to areas outside the occupied grizzly range and to state research activities.
The Ninth Circuit held that the Board of Immigration Appeals erred by failing to apply the presumption of past persecution and shifting the burden to the government regarding internal relocation for an asylum seeker from India. The court remanded the case for a reasoned, individualized analysis of whether the petitioner could safely relocate within India given his continued political advocacy, while affirming the denial of Convention Against Torture relief.
The Ninth Circuit dismissed a petition for review of a denial of motions for remand and administrative closure, holding that the criminal alien bar precludes judicial review of factual challenges to removal orders for aliens with covered convictions. The court ruled that the Supreme Court's decision in Nasrallah v. Barr abrogates the Ninth Circuit's prior 'on the merits' exception, which previously allowed review of factual findings when relief was denied on grounds other than the conviction itself.
The Ninth Circuit granted a petition for review and remanded an immigration case where the agency failed to properly evaluate documentary evidence supporting a claim of past persecution. Although the court found substantial evidence supported the agency's adverse credibility determination, the agency's misreading of key documents required a new evaluation of the petitioner's asylum claim.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a challenge to California statutes banning firearm sales on state property, ruling that the laws regulate nonexpressive conduct and do not violate the First or Second Amendments. In a related consolidated appeal, the court vacated a preliminary injunction, finding the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on their constitutional claims.
The Ninth Circuit denied a petition for review of a denial of asylum and Convention Against Torture relief, holding that the petitioner's proposed social group lacked particularity. The court also found substantial evidence supported the rejection of claims that the petitioner would face torture in Mexico.