AILA’s Advocacy Action Center allows you to advocate for legislative and policy reforms consistent with AILA’s principles and priorities.
Get InvolvedThe brand-new 18th edition of Kurzban's Immigration Law Sourcebook is now shipping.
Order NowLearn how to tackle challenges like finding and retaining affordable staff, working better in a hybrid or remote environment, when and how to raise fees, and much more.
Register NowAILALink puts an entire immigration law library at your fingertips! Search the AILALink database for all your practice needs—statutes, regs, case law, agency guidance, publications, and more.
AILA Doc. No. 17012904 | Dated February 3, 2017
The court issued a memorandum and order, declining to impose any injunctive relief and did not renew the temporary restraining order that is set to expire on Sunday, February 5, 2017, that was entered on January 29, 2017. (Louhghalam v. Trump, 2/3/17)
An amended petition for habeas corpus and complaint was filed adding additional plaintiffs, including lawful permanent residents, F-1 student visa holders, and Oxfam America, Inc. (Louhghalam v. Trump, 2/1/17)
The court issued a Temporary Restraining Order, effective for seven days, and held that the respondents must limit screening to comply with the regulations and statutes in effect prior to the Executive Order, prohibited respondents from removing or detaining affected individuals, and ordered CBP to notify airlines. (Louhghalam v. Trump, 1/29/17)
Petitioners, two lawful permanent resident Iranian nationals detained at Logan Airport as a consequence of the Executive Order, filed a petition for habeas corpus and complaint in federal court. (Louhghalam v. Trump, 1/28/17)
Cite as AILA Doc. No. 17012904.
American Immigration Lawyers Association
1331 G Street NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20005
Copyright © 1993-
American Immigration Lawyers Association.
AILA.org should not be relied upon as the exclusive source for your legal research. Nothing on AILA.org constitutes legal advice, and information on AILA.org is not a substitute for independent legal advice based on a thorough review and analysis of the facts of each individual case, and independent research based on statutory and regulatory authorities, case law, policy guidance, and for procedural issues, federal government websites.