Topic
Every decision we've filed under Civil.
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 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 Ninth Circuit affirmed a preliminary injunction blocking California's requirement that online businesses opine on and mitigate risks of children viewing harmful content, ruling it likely violates the First Amendment by compelling speech. However, the court vacated the broader injunction covering other provisions because the record was insufficient to determine if those sections are facially unconstitutional or severable from the invalid mandate.
The D.C. Circuit held that U.S. district courts have jurisdiction under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act to confirm arbitration awards against Spain, even as Spain argued EU law voided the underlying arbitration agreements. However, the court reversed the lower court's decision to enjoin Spain from seeking anti-suit relief in European courts, citing the sensitive nature of imposing such orders on a foreign sovereign.
The Ninth Circuit granted a petition for review and remanded to the Board of Immigration Appeals because the agency mischaracterized a California statute and misapplied equitable tolling standards. The court held that the state court vacated the petitioner's conviction due to a constitutional plea defect, not solely to mitigate immigration consequences.
The D.C. Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in a defamation case, ruling that the appellant's motion for additional discovery was untimely and that the statements were protected by common interest privilege. The court held that the appellant failed to meet the difficult burden of proving actual malice required to overcome that privilege.