BarbriSFCourseDetails
  • videocam On-Demand
  • signal_cellular_alt Intermediate
  • card_travel Immigration
  • schedule 90 minutes

Immigration Law After Loper Bright Decision: Anticipated Agency Impact, Ramifications for Attorneys and Clients

$297.00

This course is $0 with these passes:

BarbriPdBannerMessage

Description

A decision at the end of the recent U.S. Supreme Court term, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, will have a significant impact on federal agency rulemaking, rule implementation, and legal challenges to federal rules.

Loper Bright overruled the Chevron doctrine that, for 40 years, has provided the framework for federal courts in deciding disputes between federal agencies and private parties challenging agency regulations. Under Chevron, courts would first ask whether Congress had "directly spoken to the precise question at issue" in the statute. If not, the courts were required to defer to the agency's interpretation as long as it was reasonable. After Loper Bright, courts must exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority.

Listen as our expert panel discusses the Loper Bright decision and discusses the anticipated impacts on, and challenges to, immigration policies, procedures, and decision-making, as well as impacts for immigration attorneys and clients.

Presented By

Kaitlyn Box
Senior Associate
Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners, PLLC

Ms. Box is a Senior Associate at Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners PLLC. She works with corporate and individual clients in a wide variety of immigration and nationality matters, including labor certification, EB-1 petitions, nonimmigrant visa petitions (H-1B, TN, L, O, E-2, etc.), adjustment of status, consular matters, naturalization matters, waivers, family petitions, asylum, cancellation of removal, and TPS. She regularly represents clients during I-130, adjustment of status, and N-400 interviews before USCIS. She also assists with ethics matters for immigration lawyers. Ms. Box is the author or co-author of several articles in publications like the AILA Law Journal, Frontiers, and Bender’s Immigration Bulletin, co-authored an ethics article for AILA InfoNet, and is a frequent co-contributor to the Insightful Immigration Blog. She is a member of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), the New York State Bar Association, and the New York City Bar Association.

Cyrus D. Mehta
Founder and Managing Partner
Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners, PLLC

Mr. Mehta, a graduate of Cambridge University and Columbia Law School, is the Founder and Managing Partner of Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners PLLC in New York City.  He represents corporations and individuals from around the world in a variety of immigration matters, including business, employment, entrepreneur and investor immigration, asylum and ethics. Based on over 30 years of experience in immigration law, he is able to comprehend all kinds of problems and provide effective and ethical solutions to clients. Mr. Mehta has successfully represented clients before the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Administrative Appeals Office, Executive Office for Immigration Review, Board of Immigration Appeals, Department of Labor, Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals, DHS and EOIR Disciplinary Counsel and the federal courts. He is the Editor-in-Chief of the AILA Law Journal and conceived of the first ever AILA Law Journal Symposium in 2024.  Mr. Mehta is the immediate past Chair of AILA’s  Ethics Committee. While on the Ethics Committee, he initiated the AILA Ethics Compendium, which is now published as a book.  He is also an active board member of The New York Immigration Coalition and a board member of Volunteers of Legal Services. Mr. Mehta is also special counsel on immigration matters to the Departmental Disciplinary Committee, Appellate Division, First Department, New York. He is also an Adjunct Professor of Law at Brooklyn Law School, where he teaches a course entitled Immigration and Work.

Danielle M. Rizzo
Partner
Phillips Lytle Llp

Ms. Rizzo is a nationally recognized immigration attorney with over 17 years of experience. She assists U.S. companies and their foreign national workforce with the complexities of visa and permanent residency applications. Ms. Rizzo also represents investors and traders who require work authorizations in the United States. In addition, she represents Canadian citizens seeking entry to the United States under the U.S. Mexico-Canada-America (USMCA) free trade agreement. Ms. Rizzo also prepares foreign nationals for visa interviews at U.S. embassies and navigates land and air ports of entry to the United States. She is a nationally sought-after speaker on a broad range of immigration topics.

Mark Stevens
Attorney
Clark Hill

Mr. Stevens focuses on litigating immigration matters against federal government agencies. He represents clients before DOL, USCIS, ICE, CBP, DOS, ORR, and the immigration courts. Mr. Stevens also maintains a robust appellate practice, winning appeals at high rates before the BIA, AAO, and circuit courts. He previously managed high-volume practices in a range of areas, including labor certification (PERM), special immigrant juvenile status, consular processing, waivers of inadmissibility, and deportation defense. 

Credit Information
  • This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.


  • Live Online


    On Demand

Date + Time

  • event

    Thursday, September 26, 2024

  • schedule

    1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT

  1. Introduction: brief history of the Chevron doctrine 1984-2024
  2. Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo
  3. Anticipated impact on agency adjudications, regulatory interpretations, and other agency actions
  4. Anticipated impact on litigation
  5. Client consequences
  6. Practitioner takeaways

The panel will review these and other important issues:

  • Is the Loper Bright decision expected to lead to less uniformity in immigration law?
  • How will Loper Bright impact judicial review and interpretation of immigration statutes and policies?
  • What are the potential impacts of the decision on attorneys and clients?