Ground Agency News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

Stay updated with breaking news from Ground agency. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.

Top News In Ground Agency Today - Breaking & Trending Today

CSPAN2 Washington Journal Lee Drutman July 11, 2024

Proposal, calling on the increased role the federal government and the National Election process. Good morning welcome to washington journal. Its a great pleasure to be with you thisfo morning. See him before he gets your proposal and me ask about the election itself. Nahor jumped four weeks hence, record turnout and by the federal governments on statement a secure election, the most secure election in u. S. History. What are some of your observations. Things that you found surprising in this years election . Guest the election was a very secure election b all standards. But, and weeks and months leading up to the election there was a tremendous amount of litigation and dispute over how mail in ballots would be counted and other issues of electioneering. And followinghe election, as everyone is aware a terminus amount ofitigation. A fair amount of uncertainty as to how and when results could be certified. So i think it has cert ....

New York , United States , District Of Columbia , Chris Krebs , Reed Hastings , Government National , National Election , America Needs , Country National , Presidency Congress , Place Easy , Election Assistance Commission , Assistance Commission , Foundation Democracy , Administration Commission , Commission Also , Electional Commission , Election Security , Voting Rights , Rights Violations , Level One , Congress Need , Environmental Protection , Environmental Protection Agency , Environmental Protection Agency Richard Nixon , Protection Agency ,

CSPAN Supreme Court DACA Oral Argument July 12, 2024

Versus regions of the university of california and related cases. General francisco, general francisco. In 2017, the fifth circuit held that dhaka and expansion were likely unlawful. Face of those decisions, the department of Homeland Security determined that it no longer wish to retain the policy based on its belief that the policy was illegal, has doubt about its illegality, and its general opposition to broad, nonenforcement policies. That decision did not violate the apa for two reasons. First, it is not subject to judicial review. Previousion ended a nonenforcement policy by which the department agreed to not enforce the ima against hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens. The decision whether or not to enforce the law is committed to the unreviewable discretion, unless the statute restricts it. Nothing in the ina requires the department, a Law Enforcement agency, do ....

United States , District Of Columbia , Martin Luther King Jr , Ken Davis , Daca Dapa , University California , Department Homeland , Department Homeland Security , Homeland Security , Law Enforcement , Agency Required , Death Penalty , Say Agency , Agency Discretion , Discretion Program , Illegal Program , Forward Legal , Legal Policy , Legal Authority , Court Found , Health Actions , Congress Courts , Congress Pass , Say Something , Enforcement Discretion , Congress Done ,

CSPAN Supreme Court DACA Oral Argument July 12, 2024

Daca and the expansion of daca were likely unlawful. In the face of those decisions, the department of Homeland Security reasonably determined that it no longer wished to do wish to retain the policy, based on its belief the policy was illegal, and its general opposition to broad nonenforcement policies. The decision did not violate the apa for two reasons. First, it is not subject to judicial review. The decision is committed to the unreviewable discretion unless a statute restricts it, and nothing requires the department, a Law Enforcement agency, to not enforce the law. Second, the decision to end this nonenforcement policy was eminently reasonable. Was a temporary stopgap measure that on its face could be rescinded at any time, and the departments reasonable concerns about its legality in general opposition to broad nonenforcement policies provided more than a reasona ....

New York , United States , Barack Obama , Bader Ginsburg , Dac A Daca , Department Homeland , Department Homeland Security , Homeland Security , Law Enforcement , Agency Required , Death Penalty , Say Agency , Agency Discretion , Discretion Program , Legal Policy , Legal Authority , Congress Courts , Enforcement Discretion , Congress Done , Case Court , Court Couple , Congress Might , Surprising Congress , Congress Pass , Administration Policy , District Court ,

CSPAN Supreme Court DACA Oral Argument July 12, 2024

Based on its belief the policy was illegal, and its general opposition to broad nonenforcement policies. The decision did not violate the apa for two reasons. First, it is not subject to judicial review. The decision is committed to the unreviewable discretion unless a statute restricts it, and nothing requires the department, a Law Enforcement agency, to not enforce the law. Second, the decision to end this nonenforcement policy was eminently reasonable. Was a temporary stopgap measure that on its face could be rescinded at any time, and the departments reasonable concerns about its legality in general opposition to broad nonenforcement policies provided more than a reasonable basis for ending it. After all, an agency is not required to push its legally dubious power to not enforce the law to its logical extreme since it undermines confidence in the rule of law itself and conflicts with the agencys
United States , John Bolton , Liz Harris , Bader Ginsburg , Law Enforcement , Agency Required , Death Penalty , Say Agency , Agency Discretion , Discretion Program , Legal Policy , Legal Authority , Congress Courts , Enforcement Discretion , Congress Done , Case Court , Court Couple , Congress Might , Surprising Congress , Congress Pass , Department Homeland , Department Homeland Security , Homeland Security , Administration Policy , District Court , District Court Court ,

CSPAN Supreme Court DACA Oral Argument July 12, 2024

Argument, which took place in november. Argument first this morning in case 18 587, the department of Homeland Security the university of california and the related cases. General francisco. Mr. Chief justice, and may it please the court, in 20, the dr. Ircuit held that daca and the expansion of daca were likely unlawful. In the face of those decisions, the department of Homeland Security reasonably determined that it no longer wished to do wish to retain the policy, based on its belief the policy was illegal, and its general opposition to broad nonenforcement policies. The decision did not violate the apa for two reasons. First, it is not subject to judicial review. The decision is committed to the unreviewable discretion unless a statute restricts it, and nothing requires the department, a Law Enforcement agency ....

United States , Bader Ginsburg , Department Homeland , Department Homeland Security , Homeland Security , Homeland Security University , Security University , University California , Law Enforcement , Agency Required , Death Penalty , Say Agency , Agency Discretion , Discretion Program , Legal Policy , Legal Authority , Congress Courts , Enforcement Discretion , Congress Done , Case Court , Court Couple , Congress Might , Surprising Congress , Congress Pass , Administration Policy , District Court ,