Statements (69)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instance_of |
gptkb:legal_case
|
| gptkbp:argued_on |
April 18, 2016
|
| gptkbp:case_outcome |
political ramifications
increased scrutiny of executive actions upheld lower court ruling legal precedent established political discourse influenced advocacy for immigrant rights mobilized blocked DAPA program executive power limitations highlighted federal enforcement priorities questioned federal government authority questioned federal-state relations affected federalism debates reignited immigration enforcement policies challenged immigration policy landscape transformed immigration policy reform discussions reignited immigration reform debate intensified judicial interpretation of immigration law shifted legal challenges to executive orders expanded legal frameworks reassessed legal precedents cited in future cases legal strategies evolved limited scope of federal power no nationwide injunction political activism increased state interests recognized state litigation encouraged state litigation strategies refined state sovereignty arguments strengthened |
| gptkbp:case_types |
constitutional law
administrative law |
| gptkbp:consequences |
state lawsuits against federal policies
|
| gptkbp:court |
gptkb:United_States_Supreme_Court
|
| gptkbp:decided_by |
June 15, 2016
|
| gptkbp:dissenting_opinion |
gptkb:Justice_Ginsburg
gptkb:Justice_Breyer |
| gptkbp:docket_number |
15-674
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
Texas v. United States
|
| gptkbp:impact_on_immigration_law |
state authority
federal executive power |
| gptkbp:involved_parties |
gptkb:United_States_government
gptkb:State_of_Texas |
| gptkbp:is_cited_in |
579 U. S. 547 (2016)
|
| gptkbp:judicial_review |
executive discretion
|
| gptkbp:legal_context |
executive action on immigration
state versus federal powers |
| gptkbp:legal_framework |
future immigration cases
|
| gptkbp:legal_issue |
gptkb:immigration
|
| gptkbp:legal_principle |
standing to sue
|
| gptkbp:legal_representation |
gptkb:Texas_Attorney_General
gptkb:U._S._Department_of_Justice gptkb:federal_government separation of powers |
| gptkbp:media_coverage |
high-profile case
|
| gptkbp:outcome |
split decision
DAPA implementation |
| gptkbp:precedent |
gptkb:United_States_v._Texas
|
| gptkbp:public_perception |
gptkb:Justice_per_curiam
controversial case |
| gptkbp:related_cases |
gptkb:United_States_v._Arizona
|
| gptkbp:significance |
impact on Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA)
|
| gptkbp:bfsParent |
gptkb:King_v._Burwell
gptkb:Deferred_Action_for_Childhood_Arrivals gptkb:Biden_v._Texas gptkb:California_v._Texas gptkb:Whole_Woman's_Health_v._Hellerstedt gptkb:U._S._Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Fifth_Circuit |
| gptkbp:bfsLayer |
4
|