No. 23-5275
Ambrosio Nolasco-Ariza v. United States
Tags: constitutional-law discriminatory-purpose disparate-impact due-process equal-protection fifth-amendment immigration-and-nationality-act immigration-law racial-discrimination statutory-interpretation undesirable-aliens-act
Latest Conference:
2023-12-08
(distributed 3 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. When a law is originally adopted for an impermissible racially discriminatory purpose and continues to have a disparate impact, do subsequent amendments or reenactments cure any equal protection violation even if they do not address the original discriminatory intent?
2. Does 8 U.S.C. § 1326 violate the equal protection guarantee of the Fifth Amendment?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does 8 U.S.C. § 1326 violate the equal-protection guarantee of the Fifth-Amendment?
Docket Entries
2023-12-11
Petition DENIED.
2023-12-01
Rescheduled.
2023-12-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/8/2023.
2023-11-15
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/1/2023.
2023-11-14
Reply of petitioner Ambrosio Nolasco-Ariza filed. (Distributed)
2023-10-27
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2023-09-22
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 27, 2023.
2023-09-20
Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 27, 2023 to October 27, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
2023-08-28
Response Requested. (Due September 27, 2023)
2023-08-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/26/2023.
2023-08-08
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2023-08-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 5, 2023)
Attorneys
Ambrosio Nolasco-Ariza
Kristin Michelle Kimmelman — Federal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
United States of America
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent