Aurelia Butler

The ruling issued by a federal judge in Texas struck down a new initiative aimed at helping undocumented spouses of U.S. citizens stay in the country.A federal judge in Texas on Thursday struck down a new Biden administration program that sought to provide a path to U.S. citizenship for hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants married to American citizens.The ruling, issued by Judge J. Campbell Barker of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, came months after 16 Republican-led states, led by Texas’ attorney general, Ken Paxton, filed a lawsuit claiming that the administration lacked the legal authority to enact the program. In August, Judge Barker temporarily blocked the initiative, just days after it had gone into place.On Thursday, in a 74-page decision, he explained that the Biden administration did not have the authority to create the program, which would have been unlikely to remain in place after President-elect Trump took office in January.The Biden administration started the initiative, known as Keeping Families Together, in August, allowing undocumented immigrants who were married to U.S. citizens and had been in the United States for 10 years or more a chance to gain a green card without leaving the country.Read the Judge’s RulingA federal judge in Texas struck down a new Biden administration program that sought to provide a path to U.S. citizenship for hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants married to American citizens.Read Document 74 pagesGenerally, immigrants who have entered the United States illegally must leave the country to complete the green card process, which can take years. The Biden program, which was in place for a week, allowed those who were married to U.S. citizens to remain in the country by granting them what the immigration system refers to as “parole,” a status that also protected them from deportation.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

A professor sued pre-emptively to release software that would let users automatically unfollow everyone in their Facebook feed.An attempt to sue Meta using a law that shields tech giants from liability is dead for now.A federal judge on Thursday dismissed a suit brought by a professor who wants to build a tool that allows Facebook users to unfollow everyone in their feed. Ethan Zuckerman, who teaches public policy at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, had asked a federal court to rule that Meta, Facebook’s owner, couldn’t sue him if he went through with his plan.Mr. Zuckerman and his lawyers, who work at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, were relying on a little-used portion of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a 1996 law that shields Meta and other tech giants from lawsuits over content posted by their users.Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted Meta’s request to dismiss the lawsuit on Thursday, according to court records. The judge said Mr. Zuckerman could refile the lawsuit at a later date.“We’re disappointed the court believes Professor Zuckerman needs to code the tool before the court resolves the case,” said Ramya Krishnan, one of Mr. Zuckerman’s lawyers. “We continue to believe that Section 230 protects user-empowering tools, and look forward to the court considering that argument at a later time.”A spokesman for Meta pointed to an earlier statement by the company that called the lawsuit “baseless.”Mr. Zuckerman’s lawsuit was a novel salvo in a fight over who gets to control the experience on social media platforms. He wants to create a tool that will wipe a Facebook user’s feed clean. But Meta has previously sent a threatening legal letter to a software developer who released a similar tool.Mr. Zuckerman’s case hinged on a portion of Section 230 that protects the ability to restrict obscene or troublesome content, saying it should apply to any content that users don’t want to see. More

Evans Clinchy opens our solving weekend.Jump to: Tricky CluesFRIDAY PUZZLE — This is Evans Clinchy’s seventh puzzle in The New York Times, and today’s crossword is in what seems to be his sweet spot: All of his contributions have been Friday or Saturday grids.Maybe Mr. Clinchy sticks to the hardest days of the week because he enjoys that tough puzzle cage fight between constructor and solver. I know that I went a couple of rounds with his clues, but ultimately found his crossword very satisfying to solve.Tricky Clues14A. In today’s puzzle, the “bread” in [French bread] is slang for money, so the answer is EURO.23A. The [Big brothers?] are ABBOTS, who lead the other monks in monasteries.31A. If you are passing through a RIDGE, you are taking [… the high road?].43A. I was hoping that [Bump above a belt] wasn’t a reference to beer bellies, and I was not disappointed. It’s a much smaller bump: The answer is OUTIE.3D. The “flight” in [Pricey flight options, perhaps] is not about riding on an airplane. It’s a selection of CRAFT BEERS served in small glasses at a tasting.4D. You can’t have tomfoolery without TOMFOOLS, or [Doofuses].11D. When people take a daily [Constitutional], they are taking a WALK.40D. Someone who is [… on a roll] might be a person who is doing well. In this puzzle, Mr. Clinchy is referring to people who are on a list of registered voters, also known as a VOTER roll.Constructor NotesMy original clue for 15-Across was, [He wrote in his 2023 memoir, “The movement for trans liberation affects us all”].Poignant words, especially at times like these.Join Our Other Game DiscussionsWant to be part of the conversation about New York Times Games, or maybe get some help with a particularly thorny puzzle? Here are the:Spelling Bee ForumWordle ReviewConnections CompanionImprove Your Crossword SolvingWork your way through our guide, “How to Solve the New York Times Crossword.” It contains an explanation of most of the types of clues you will see in the puzzles and a practice Mini at the end of each section.Want to Submit Crosswords to The New York Times?The New York Times Crossword has an open submission system, and you can submit your puzzles online.For tips on how to get started, read our series “How to Make a Crossword Puzzle.”The Tipping PointAlmost finished solving but need a bit more help? We’ve got you covered.Spoiler alert: Subscribers can take a peek at the answer key.Trying to get back to the main Gameplay page? You can find it here. More

Mayor Eric Adams is ending a contentious pilot program that gave 2,600 migrant families debit cards to purchase food.New York City will end a contentious program that provided debit cards to migrant families to purchase food, city officials announced on Thursday.The pilot program came under fire from the moment it was announced in February, with critics concerned that the cards could be misused and questioning whether it was fair to give preferential treatment to migrants over others in need.Mayor Eric Adams has defended it, arguing that the program would bring down the costs of feeding migrants and give them a wider array of healthier options at supermarkets and bodegas.But his administration has decided not to renew the one-year contract, which had been given to Mobility Capital Finance, known as MoCaFi, on a no-bid emergency basis.The city’s Department of Investigation is investigating the contract with MoCaFi, The New York Daily News reported in October.In explaining the city’s decision on Thursday, Mr. Adams made no mention of the investigation. He said that given the city’s “constant decrease in our population” of migrants, there was no need to renew an emergency contract.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

Emmy Rossum and Zoë Winters star in a new Off Broadway play that’s a climate disaster drama cohabiting with a domestic soap opera.Despite its name and original mission, Second Stage Theater, founded in 1979, has in recent years expanded its reach to include many new works by early-career playwrights.The latest beneficiary of that expansion is Amy Berryman, who makes her professional New York debut with “Walden,” the promising but unconvincing story of twin astronaut sisters on opposite sides of a philosophical divide in a devastating climate dystopia. It opened Thursday at Second Stage’s Off Broadway space, the Tony Kiser Theater in Midtown Manhattan.The promising part of the play is the new angle it offers on an old sci-fi setup. In Berryman’s vision of the near future, Earth has reached what the sisters call P.O.N.R., for “point of no return.” NASA, having (like Second Stage) expanded its original mission, decides to accelerate plans to build habitations on Mars. But unlike movies with a similar premise, the prime movers here are women.That makes for fresh takes on the usual questions of home and hearth and the fate of humanity. It’s nice to see that, at least at first, Cassie (Zoë Winters) is a gung-ho adventurer. Having just returned from a year on the moon, where she became the first person to “grow something from nothing” on its inhospitable surface, she has now been asked to lead an epochal mission to Mars.Not that Earth’s surface is much more hospitable, with violent weather and rising tides killing millions and causing wars. In response, Cassie’s skittish sister, Stella, has retreated to the American interior to nest in a corrugated but strangely chic wilderness cabin. Stella (Emmy Rossum) is also an astronaut — or was. Though she left NASA under mysterious circumstances, her design for a new habitation called Walden will be the one used on Mars. Cassie will likely live there for the rest of her life.On the weekend before she begins training for that future, Cassie visits Stella after a long estrangement. Inevitably, a debate breaks out between them about whether to prioritize saving the planet (as Stella favors) or preparing an escape route (as Cassie does). Encouraging Stella’s view is her boyfriend, Bryan (Motell Foster), a so-called Earth Advocate for whom expanding the reach of human depravity to virgin new worlds is a poor excuse for not cleaning up the old one.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

Case 6:24-cv-00306-JCB Document 120 Filed 11/07/24 Page 6 of 74 PageID #: 2962
a foreign port or place or from an outlying possession.” Id.
§ 101(a)(13), 66 Stat. at 167.³
c. Obtaining LPR status. – As today, status as an alien law-
fully admitted for permanent residence (LPR or “green card” sta-
tus) enabled an alien’s eventual naturalization as a U.S. citizen. Id.
§ 318, 66 Stat. at 244 (“no person shall be naturalized unless he
has been lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent res-
idence”), codified as amended at 8 U.S.C. § 1429. The INA of 1952
defined two processes for obtaining LPR status.
First, an alien could apply for an immigrant visa at a U.S. con-
sulate or embassy abroad, wait for one to become available and to
issue, and then travel to a U.S. port of entry and be admitted for
permanent residence under that visa. Id. §§ 101(a)(9) (consular
officer), 203 (numerical limits), 211 (admission), 221 (consular is-
suance), 66 Stat. at 166-67, 178–79, 181-82, 191–92. Aliens often
had to wait their turn for immigrant visas to become available be-
cause of annual limits on visa issuance. See id. § 201, 66 Stat. at
175-76, codified as amended at 8 U.S.C. § 1151.4
Second, an alien lawfully admitted to the United States in one
status could, while here, adjust to LPR status. Under INA
§ 245(a), an alien “lawfully admitted to the United States as a
bona fide nonimmigrant,” and who so entered the country, could
petition for adjustment to LPR status upon certain showings re-
lated to immigrant visas. Id. § 245(a), 66 Stat. at 217. But an alien’s
parole from detention pending exclusion proceedings was not “an
admission of the alien,” id. § 212(d)(5), 66 Stat. at 188, and thus
did not allow the alien to petition to adjust to LPR status.
³ One exception was made, providing that LPR aliens were not “regarded”
as “making an entry into the United States for purposes of the immigration
laws” if they did not intend or reasonably expect to depart from the United
States in the first place. Id.; see Rosenberg v. Fleuti, 374 U.S. 449 (1963) (inter-
preting that clause). The need for that exception confirms that the term “en-
try” itself refers to a physical movement into the country.
4 Certain immediate relatives of U.S. citizens, however, have been ex-
empted from immigrant-visa quotas. E.g., id. § 101(a)(27)(A), 66 Stat. at 169
(“nonquota immigrants”); id. § 201(c), 66 Stat. at 176.
-6- More

Un Partido Demócrata deprimido y desmoralizado está iniciando el doloroso camino hacia un futuro en gran medida fuera del poder, mientras sus líderes se enfrentan a lo mucho que subestimaron el resurgimiento de Donald Trump en la nación.El repudio nacional al partido dejó atónitos a muchos demócratas que habían expresado una confianza “nauseabunda” sobre sus posibilidades en las últimas semanas de la contienda. Mientras rebuscaban entre los restos de sus derrotas, no encontraron respuestas fáciles a por qué los votantes rechazaron tan decisivamente a sus candidatos.En más de dos decenas de entrevistas, legisladores, estrategas y funcionarios ofrecieron una letanía de explicaciones sobre el fracaso de la vicepresidenta Kamala Harris, y casi todas ellas encajaban perfectamente en sus nociones preconcebidas de cómo ganar en política.Las críticas discretas, en llamadas telefónicas, chats grupales y sombrías reuniones de equipo, fueron un anticipo entre bastidores de la batalla intrapartidista que se avecina, una en la que los demócratas caerían rápidamente en las desavenencias ideológicas que han definido a su partido durante gran parte de la era Trump.Lo indiscutible fue lo mal que les fue a los demócratas. Perdieron la Casa Blanca, cedieron el control del Senado y parecían abocados a la derrota en la Cámara de Representantes. Obtuvieron peores resultados que hace cuatro años en ciudades y suburbios, pueblos rurales y ciudades universitarias. Un primer análisis de los resultados realizado por el New York Times reveló que la inmensa mayoría de los más de 3100 condados del país se habían inclinado hacia la derecha desde la victoria del presidente Biden en 2020.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

London Breed, San Francisco’s first Black woman mayor who steered the city through the pandemic but also saw its quality of life sink, conceded her re-election race on Thursday.Ms. Breed said in a news conference at City Hall that she had called Daniel Lurie, an heir to the Levi Strauss fortune who has never held elected office, to congratulate him on his win.“Being mayor of San Francisco has been the greatest honor of my lifetime,” she told journalists in a meeting room off her office. “I’m beyond grateful to our residents for the opportunity to serve the city that raised me.”The Associated Press had not yet called the race, though local news outlets did. Ms. Breed said she thought it would take “a miracle” to change the outcome at this point.Mr. Lurie will take office in January, and Ms. Breed vowed she would work to ensure a smooth transition. Both Mr. Lurie and Ms. Breed are Democrats and San Francisco natives who grew up mere miles from each other, he in luxury and she in poverty.Mr. Lurie, the founder of an anti-poverty nonprofit, said in an email that he would speak Friday morning. “I’m deeply grateful to my incredible family, campaign team and every San Franciscan who voted for accountability, service and change,” he wrote.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More