This HTML5 document contains 122 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
dbohttp://dbpedia.org/ontology/
n15http://dbpedia.org/resource/File:
foafhttp://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
n23https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/591/19-161/
n11https://apps.oyez.org/player/%23/roberts10/oral_argument_audio/
n19https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
n8https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/
n7https://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/
dbthttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
n21https://www.leagle.com/decision/
n17https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx%3Ffilename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/
n18http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:FilePath/
n22https://houstonlawreview.org/api/v1/articles/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
wikipedia-enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbchttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
dbphttp://dbpedia.org/property/
provhttp://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
wikidatahttp://www.wikidata.org/entity/
n24https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/

Statements

Subject Item
dbr:Department_of_Homeland_Security_v._Thuraissigiam
rdf:type
dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase dbo:UnitOfWork owl:Thing wikidata:Q2334719 dbo:Case dbo:LegalCase
rdfs:label
Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam
rdfs:comment
Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam, 591 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case involving whether the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, which limits habeas corpus judicial review of the decisions of immigration officers, violates the Suspension Clause of Article One of the U.S. Constitution. In the 7–2 opinion, the Court ruled that the law does not violate the Suspension Clause.
foaf:name
Department of Homeland Security, et al., petitioners v. Vijayakumar Thuraissigiam
foaf:depiction
n18:Samuel_Alito_official_photo.jpg
dcterms:subject
dbc:United_States_immigration_and_naturalization_case_law dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Roberts_Court dbc:Right_of_asylum_case_law dbc:Sri_Lankan_Tamil_diaspora dbc:Sri_Lanka–United_States_relations dbc:2020_in_United_States_case_law dbc:Right_of_asylum_in_the_United_States
dbo:wikiPageID
62723245
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
1087394185
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:F.3d dbr:Stephen_Breyer dbr:Preponderance_of_the_evidence dbr:Writ dbc:United_States_immigration_and_naturalization_case_law dbc:Right_of_asylum_case_law dbr:Unconstitutional dbr:U.S._District_Court_for_the_Southern_District_of_California dbc:Sri_Lankan_Tamil_diaspora dbr:Neil_Gorsuch dbc:Sri_Lanka–United_States_relations dbr:Sonia_Sotomayor dbr:Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:U.S._Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Ninth_Circuit dbr:Undocumented_immigrants dbr:Clarence_Thomas dbr:Linda_Greenhouse dbr:Expedited_removal dbr:Due_Process_Clause dbr:The_New_York_Times dbr:American_Civil_Liberties_Union dbr:Jurisdiction n15:Samuel_Alito_official_photo.jpg dbr:Suspension_Clause dbr:Houston_Law_Review dbr:Habeas_corpus dbr:United_States_Supreme_Court dbr:Judicial_review dbr:Brett_Kavanaugh dbr:Asylum_in_the_United_States dbr:Legal_Information_Institute dbr:Elena_Kagan dbc:2020_in_United_States_case_law dbr:Certiorari dbr:Illegal_Immigration_Reform_and_Immigrant_Responsibility_Act_of_1996 dbr:Article_One_of_the_U.S._Constitution dbr:Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Ruth_Bader_Ginsburg dbr:John_Roberts dbr:Tamil_people dbr:F._Supp._3d dbc:Right_of_asylum_in_the_United_States dbr:Immigration_judge dbr:Department_of_Homeland_Security dbr:Majority_opinion dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Roberts_Court dbr:U.S._district_court dbr:Sri_Lanka dbr:Samuel_Alito
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
n11:24973 n8:19-161_g314.pdf n17:19-161.html n7:19-161 n21:infco20190307136 n21:infdco20180309c87 n22:7954-unheard-and-deported-the-unconstitutional-denial-of-habeas-corpus-in-expedited-removal.pdf n23: n24:1252
owl:sameAs
wikidata:Q85756406 n19:BxtYW
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dbt:Ussc dbt:Cite_journal dbt:Convert dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case dbt:Reflist dbt:Uscsub dbt:USArticleI
dbo:thumbnail
n18:Samuel_Alito_official_photo.jpg?width=300
dbp:dissent
Sotomayor
dbp:docket
19
dbp:joindissent
Kagan
dbp:joinmajority
Roberts, Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh
dbp:lawsapplied
dbr:Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Illegal_Immigration_Reform_and_Immigrant_Responsibility_Act_of_1996
dbp:oralargument
n11:24973
dbp:oyez
n7:19-161
dbp:parallelcitations
140
dbp:prior
25920.0
dbp:uspage
___
dbp:usvol
591
dbp:arguedate
0001-03-02
dbp:argueyear
2020
dbp:case
Dept. of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam,
dbp:decidedate
0001-06-25
dbp:decideyear
2020
dbp:fullname
Department of Homeland Security, et al., petitioners v. Vijayakumar Thuraissigiam
dbp:holding
The limits set by the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 on review that a federal court may conduct on a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under does not violate the Suspension Clause.
dbp:justia
n23:
dbp:litigants
Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam
dbp:majority
Alito
dbp:otherSource
Supreme Court
dbp:otherUrl
n8:19-161_g314.pdf
dbo:abstract
Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam, 591 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case involving whether the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, which limits habeas corpus judicial review of the decisions of immigration officers, violates the Suspension Clause of Article One of the U.S. Constitution. In the 7–2 opinion, the Court ruled that the law does not violate the Suspension Clause. The Department of Homeland Security placed Vijayakumar Thuraissigiam into "expedited removal" proceedings after Thuraissigiam was apprehended 25 yards (23 m) from the southern U.S. border after crossing it illegally. Thuraissigiam, a Tamil former resident of Sri Lanka, pled for asylum asserting that he fled his country to "escape torture, beatings, and likely death". An immigration officer did not find his fear of persecution credible, and an immigration judge agreed with the officer's findings. Thuraissigiam, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, then filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, which a U.S. district court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because of a section in the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 that limits the judicial review of decisions made by immigration officers. On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed, holding the section of the Act was unconstitutional because it violated the Suspension Clause. On June 25, 2020, the Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit. In a majority opinion authored by Justice Samuel Alito, the Court found that Thuraissigiam's claim for habeas corpus, to seek additional administrative review of his asylum claim, was beyond the scope established for habeas corpus in the Constitution, to secure release from unlawful detention. The majority opinion further rejected the argument that the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment also compels judicial review of Thuraissigiam's claim.
dbp:concurrence
Thomas Breyer
dbp:joinconcurrence
Ginsburg
prov:wasDerivedFrom
wikipedia-en:Department_of_Homeland_Security_v._Thuraissigiam?oldid=1087394185&ns=0
dbo:wikiPageLength
14872
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
wikipedia-en:Department_of_Homeland_Security_v._Thuraissigiam