Litigating Immigration Cases in Federal Court
| Release Date: 09/17/2025 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Format | Size | ISBN |
| 1323 pages | 978-157370-805-0 | |
| eBook | 1323 pages | 978-1-57370-806-2 |
Are you prepared to fight back against escalating attacks on immigrants? More than ever, federal court litigation is an essential tool for immigration lawyers to zealously advocate for their clients in the face of restrictive policies, procedural hurdles, and aggressive enforcement.
Do you have the up-to-date analysis and guidance you need? The legal landscape for federal court litigation has undergone dramatic shifts in the past two years. In the upcoming new edition of Litigating Immigration Cases in Federal Court, renowned litigator Robert Pauw breaks down the latest Supreme Court rulings that have redefined the scope of judicial review, creating new opportunities for challenges in some areas while imposing tighter limits in others.
Key case law updates in the new edition:
- Loper Bright Enters. v. Raimondo overturns Chevron deference, reshaping decades of judicial deference to agency decisions and opening the door to revisiting unfavorable precedents.
- Wilkinson v. Garland restores judicial review in certain discretionary decisions, including cancellation of removal
- DOS v. Munoz reinforces consular nonreviewability, creating a narrow but significant barrier to review
- Riley v. Bondi establishes a counterintuitive deadline rule for withholding-only proceedings, posing traps for unrepresented individuals and the unwary.
- FDA v. All. for Hippocratic Med. alters the standing analysis, with major implications for nonprofit plaintiffs.
The new edition also features updated discussion of Expedited Removal under §1225(b)(1) and recent cases challenging policies implemented by the Biden and Trump Administrations to restrict asylum, withholding, and CAT relief.
This essential resource explains the practical implications of recent rulings, analyzes emerging interpretations from lower courts, and offers strategies for litigators working to protect their clients’ rights in a rapidly evolving judicial environment.
Order your copy today!
*Interested in a bulk purchase? Contact us to receive a bulk discount when purchasing 5 or more copies.
Robert Pauw has over 30 years of experience litigating immigration cases. He is a founding partner of the Seattle law firm Gibbs Houston Pauw. He has represented hundreds of plaintiffs in significant immigration cases, including the following:
- Martinez v. Clark, 124 F.4th 775 (9th Cir. 2024) (challenge to BIA’s denial of bond)
- Al Otro Lado v. EOIR, 120 F.4th 606 (9th Cir. 2024) (affirming injunction preventing government from applying “Transit Ban Rule” to asylum seekers turned away under metering policy)
- Vega-Anguiano v. Barr, 982 F.3d 542 (9th Cir. 2020) (challenge in reinstatement proceedings to validity of prior removal order)
- Zerezghi v. USCIS, 955 F.3d 802 (9th Cir. 2020) (challenge to USCIS imposition of marriage fraud penalty)
- Zuniga v. Barr, 934 F.3d 1083 (9th Cir. 2019) (challenge to expedited removal under 8 USC §1228 based on lack of access to counsel)
- Rosario v. USCIS, 365 F. Supp. 3d 1156 (W.D. Wash. 2018) (nationwide class action lawsuit challenging delays in processing applications for work authorization)
- Hajro v. USCIS, 811 F.3d 1086 (9th Cir. 2016) (challenge to USCIS delays in processing FOIA requests)
- Smith v. CBP, 741 F.3d 1016 (9th Cir. 2014) (district court has jurisdiction under 8 USC §1252(e)(2)(B) to consider noncitizen’s challenge to expedited removal order)
- Wayne Smith and Hugo Armendariz v. United States, No. 12.562 (IACHR 2010) (challenge to U.S. deportation policies adopted in IIRAIRA as violating the American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man)
- Ruiz-Diaz v. United States, 618 F.3d 1055 (9th Cir. 2010) (nationwide class action lawsuit challenging USCIS policy of refusing to allow religious workers to file concurrent I-360/I-485 applications)
- Morales-Izquierdo v. Gonzales, 486 F.3d 484 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc) (challenge to regulations implementing the reinstatement statute)
- Perez-Enriquez v. Gonzales, 463 F.3d 1007 (9th Cir. 2006) (en banc) (establishing that individuals who obtained lawful permanent residence under the SAW legalization program are eligible for INA §212(c) waivers of deportation)
- Lee v. Gonzales, No. C04-449 RSL (W.D. Wash. 2006) (class action lawsuit challenging naturalization denials based on lack of good moral character)
- Immigrant Assistance Project v. INS, 306 F.3d 842 (9th Cir. 2002) (nationwide class action lawsuit challenging INS’s interpretation of “known to the government” and “continuous unlawful residence” for purposes of the legalization program)
- Gete v. INS, 121 F.3d 1285 (9th Cir. 1997) (class action lawsuit invalidating INS vehicle seizure procedures)
In addition to his book, Pauw’s published articles include: Shaping Immigration Policy Through Federal Courts, 6 AILA Law Journal 165 (April 2024); Plenary Power: An Outmoded Doctrine, 51 Emory L.J. 1095 (2002); and A New Look at Deportation as Punishment: Why at Least Some of the Constitution’s Criminal Procedure Protections Must Apply, 52 Admin. L. Rev. (2000). He served as an adjunct professor of immigration law at Seattle University School of Law for over 25 years. In recognition of his achievements, Pauw has received numerous awards, including AILA’s Jack Wasserman Award for Excellence in Litigation, the NWIRP Amicus Award for the pursuit of justice for low-income immigrants and refugees, and the National Lawyers Guild’s Carol King Award.
