Every decision we've summarized — searchable, filterable, neutral.
The Second Circuit dismissed the Republic of Sudan's interlocutory appeal, ruling that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act's appellate bar precludes immediate review of immunity denials under the collateral-order doctrine. Sudan must now await a final judgment on the merits before challenging the district court's denial of sovereign immunity.
The Second Circuit dismissed the Republic of Sudan's interlocutory appeal, ruling that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act's state-sponsored terrorism exception bars immediate appeals under the collateral-order doctrine. Because the district court did not certify the order for immediate appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), the appellate court lacks jurisdiction to review the immunity denial until the underlying litigation concludes.
The Second Circuit held that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act's appellate bar eliminates all interlocutory appeals under the collateral-order doctrine for cases involving state-sponsored terrorism. Consequently, the Republic of Sudan cannot immediately appeal the denial of its immunity claims and must await final judgment.
The Second Circuit held that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act's appellate bar eliminates all interlocutory appeals under the collateral-order doctrine for actions brought under the state-sponsored terrorism exception. Consequently, the Republic of Sudan's immediate appeal challenging immunity denials was dismissed because the district court failed to certify the order for immediate review.
The Second Circuit dismissed the Republic of Sudan's interlocutory appeal, holding that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act's appellate bar precludes immediate review of immunity denials under the collateral-order doctrine. Sudan must await a final judgment before challenging the district court's ruling that it lacks sovereign immunity.
The Ninth Circuit held that an immigration judge committed legal error by refusing to consider new evidence based on the mistaken belief that he lacked the discretion to do so. The court remanded the case, instructing the immigration judge to exercise discretion before rejecting the petitioner's additional evidence regarding his fear of persecution.
The Ninth Circuit clarified that while it lacks jurisdiction to review adverse credibility findings in good faith marriage waiver cases, it retains limited authority to review the ultimate good faith determination as a mixed question of law and fact. Applying this deferential standard, the court affirmed the denial of Zia's waiver petition because his testimony lacked weight and the remaining evidence did not compel reversal of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision.
The Fifth Circuit remanded the case to the district court to determine whether the Secretary of Commerce ratified the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council's actions. The court held that the lower court must first address the ratification theory before ruling on the Appointments Clause challenges.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed a felon-in-possession sentence, holding that the Sentencing Commission's commentary defining a large capacity magazine warrants judicial deference. The court ruled that the term is ambiguous and the Commission's interpretation of over fifteen rounds is reasonable.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed Gail Manney's conviction for making false statements on a federal firearm purchase form, ruling that the Second Amendment does not protect the act of lying to a dealer. The court further held that such misrepresentations are legally material regardless of whether the actual purchaser is legally eligible to own a gun.
