5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals

A federal appeals court in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas issued a stay on rulings that freed three immigrants, supporting the Trump administration's mandatory detention policy. The policy requires detention without bond for immigrants who entered the U.S. illegally, regardless of criminal history or asylum applications. The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the policy's legality in October 2023.

A federal appeals court in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas granted a stay to three rulings that freed immigrants without criminal records under the Trump administration's mandatory detention policy. The policy, aimed at detaining immigrants who entered the U.S. illegally without bond, faces legal challenges, with the U.S. Supreme Court expected to rule on its legality soon.

A federal appeals court in the 5th Circuit blocked the release of three immigrants in Texas, marking a rare victory for the Trump administration's mandatory detention policy. The decision, which applies to Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, will be reviewed in a September court hearing.

The Trump administration secured a court victory when the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stayed rulings that had freed three immigrants without criminal records, supporting its mandatory detention policy. The policy, part of a July 2025 memo, aims for 1 million annual removals but faces legal challenges, with the U.S. Supreme Court likely to rule on its legality.

The Trump administration secured a court stay allowing continued detention of three Texas immigrants without bond, as the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals halted lower court rulings that had freed them. The decision impacts Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, where immigrants are detained under a policy aiming for 1 million annual removals. Critics argue the ruling lacks precedent, while the administration claims it reinforces immigration enforcement authority.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the Trump administration’s mandatory detention policy, staying court orders that had freed three immigrants in Texas. The decision applies to Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, where the policy aims to detain immigrants who entered illegally without bond, a key part of the administration’s goal to increase removals. The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on the policy’s legality in its October term.

A federal appeals court covering Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas issued a stay on three court rulings that had freed immigrants without criminal records, supporting the Trump administration's mandatory detention policy. The policy, part of a July 2025 memo, requires immigrants entering the U.S. illegally to be detained without bond while awaiting removal proceedings.

The Trump administration is seeking to reverse a court decision that granted bond hearings to immigrants in mandatory detention, arguing that such rulings overwhelm court resources. Three immigrants, detained under the policy for crossing the border illegally, were recently freed by judges but face potential re-detention under the administration's appeal. The American Immigration Council, representing the immigrants, highlights their long U.S. residency, no criminal records, and harsh detention conditions.

The Trump administration is seeking to detain three immigrants, arguing that a surge of court cases freeing detainees is straining judicial resources. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is reviewing whether immigrants held for crossing borders illegally have the right to bond hearings, with the administration claiming the current policy violates the constitution. The immigrants, who have no criminal records and U.S. citizen children, were previously released by federal judges in Texas.

The Trump administration is seeking to reinstate mandatory detention for three immigrants by asking an appeals court to reverse a prior decision that allowed them bond hearings. The court case challenges a policy requiring immigrants who crossed the border illegally to be detained indefinitely, with arguments highlighting the strain on legal resources and the harsh conditions in detention facilities.

The Trump administration is urging the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to detain three immigrants freed by Texas judges, arguing that a surge of court cases freeing immigrants violates the mandatory detention policy. The immigrants, who have no criminal records and U.S. citizen children, were held in facilities like Louisiana State Penitentiary’s Camp 57, where conditions included poor food and medical care. The full appeals court will hear the case in September.

The Trump administration is urging an appeals court to detain three immigrants previously released by Texas judges, arguing that thousands of court cases freeing immigrants from mandatory detention strain judicial resources. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hold a full hearing in September on a policy requiring immigrants to be detained if they crossed the border illegally.

The Trump administration seeks to reinstate mandatory detention for three immigrants recently freed by Texas federal judges, arguing that habeas petitions challenging the policy strain judicial resources. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hold a full hearing on the case in September.

The Trump administration is urging the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to detain three immigrants after federal judges in Texas freed them in February and March. The court will hear a full case in September, with the administration arguing that habeas petitions challenging mandatory detention policies strain judicial resources.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a previous decision requiring bond hearings for immigrants detained under the Trump administration’s mandatory detention policy, allowing indefinite detention without bond in facilities across Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. The Supreme Court will review a related case next October, while other appeals courts have previously struck down the policy as unconstitutional.

A federal appeals court ended over 60 years of federal oversight of the Concordia Parish School Board in Louisiana, which was under a desegregation mandate since 1965. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision supports the Trump administration’s push to eliminate court-ordered desegregation plans, which Louisiana officials called federal overreach. The case originated from a 1965 lawsuit by Black families in Ferriday, who sought access to all-white schools during segregation.

A federal appeals court ended a 60-year desegregation order in Louisiana's Concordia Parish School Board, a decision supported by the Trump administration and Louisiana officials who called it a relic of past segregation. The case originated in 1965 when Black families sued for access to all-white schools, leading to integration efforts as white families later moved away from the area.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals initially ruled the Trump administration’s policy of detaining immigrants without bond unconstitutional but later voted to rehear the case en banc, canceling the prior decision. The case involves three immigrants in Texas who challenged their detention, and the rehearing could affect thousands in detention in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi.

A federal appeals court reversed a previous decision requiring bond hearings for immigrants held under the Trump administration’s mandatory detention policy. This allows many immigration prisoners to remain detained indefinitely without bond in detention centers in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will rehear the case in September, while the Supreme Court has agreed to address a related case next October.

A federal appeals court reversed a decision requiring bond hearings for immigrants under the Trump administration’s mandatory detention policy, allowing indefinite detention without bond in detention centers in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will rehear the case in September, while the Supreme Court agreed to resolve related legal conflicts in October.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a decision requiring bond hearings for immigrants detained under the Trump administration’s mandatory detention policy, allowing indefinite detention without bond in centers in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. The Supreme Court will review the case next, and the 8th Circuit Court has upheld the policy in seven Midwestern states.

A federal appeals court reversed a decision requiring bond hearings for immigrants under the Trump administration’s mandatory detention policy, allowing indefinite detention without bond in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will rehear the case in September, while the Supreme Court will address related conflicts next session.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a previous ruling requiring bond hearings for immigrants under the Trump administration’s mandatory detention policy, allowing indefinite detention without bond in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. The Supreme Court will address a related case in October, while the 8th Circuit Court upheld the policy in seven Midwestern states.

A federal appeals court rejected a defense of the Texas Dream Act, ending a state law that allowed undocumented students to pay in-state tuition at public colleges. The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that federal law prohibits such benefits unless available to all U.S. citizens. Advocacy groups and educational institutions criticized the decision, while Governor Greg Abbott praised it as a legal victory.

A U.S. appeals court ruled 2-1 that immigrants detained for crossing a border illegally must receive a bond hearing within 90 days, challenging the Trump administration’s mandatory detention policy. The decision affects Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, where many New York immigrants are transferred, and adds to ongoing legal battles that may reach the Supreme Court.

A 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling mandates bond hearings within 90 days for immigrants detained under Trump's mandatory detention policy, affecting Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. The 2-1 decision faces opposition from the Trump administration, which argues the policy is 'constitutionally sound,' while other courts have previously struck down similar provisions. The case involves Texas residents with no criminal history and U.S. citizen children.

A U.S. appeals court ruled 2-1 that immigrants arrested for crossing a border illegally must receive a bond hearing within 90 days, challenging the Trump administration’s mandatory detention policy. The decision affects Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, where many immigrants are transferred after arrest, and follows conflicting rulings from other courts, with the Supreme Court expected to review the policy in October.

A 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling requires immigrants detained under Trump's mandatory detention policy to receive bond hearings within 90 days, affecting Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. The decision faces opposition from the Department of Homeland Security, which claims it disagrees with the ruling and seeks Supreme Court review. The policy, criticized as unconstitutional by multiple courts, has been partially reversed in some states.

A 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling requires immigrants detained under Trump's mandatory detention policy to receive bond hearings within 90 days, affecting Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. The decision, which contrasts with prior rulings, challenges the policy's constitutionality and may lead to Supreme Court review.

A U.S. appeals court ruled 2-1 that immigrants detained under the Trump administration’s mandatory detention policy must receive bond hearings within 90 days, marking another legal challenge to the policy. The decision affects Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, where many immigrants are transferred for detention, and follows conflicting rulings from other courts, with the Supreme Court likely to review the issue later this year.

A 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling requires immigrants detained for crossing borders illegally to receive bond hearings within 90 days, challenging the Trump administration’s mandatory detention policy. The decision affects Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, where many New York immigrants are transferred, and contradicts earlier rulings in other states. The Department of Homeland Security disputes the decision, seeking Supreme Court review.

A U.S. appeals court ruled 2-1 that immigrants detained for crossing the border illegally must receive a bond hearing within 90 days, challenging the Trump administration’s mandatory detention policy. The decision affects Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, where many New Yorkers are transferred after arrest. The Department of Homeland Security opposes the ruling, which aligns with broader judicial pushback against the policy.

The U.S. Supreme Court allowed Texas to enforce a law requiring app stores to verify users' ages and obtain parental consent for minors downloading apps or making in-app purchases. The law, the Texas App Store Accountability Act, was upheld by a 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling after a district court had initially deemed it unconstitutional. Plaintiffs, including the Computer & Communications Industry Association and Students Engaged in Advancing Texas, argued the law violates First Amendment rights, while Texas officials claimed it protects children from harmful digital content.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to block Texas from enforcing a law requiring app stores to verify users' ages and obtain parental consent for minors. The decision allows the Texas App Store Accountability Act to proceed, with plaintiffs including the Computer & Communications Industry Association and Students Engaged in Advancing Texas challenging its constitutionality. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is a defendant in the cases.

Sen. John Kennedy is expected to influence the nomination for an open seat on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Potential candidates include Louisiana Solicitor General J. Benjamin Aguiñaga, Anna St. John, and James Baehr. Kennedy, whose position on the Judiciary Committee allows him to block nominees, previously opposed unqualified judicial picks during Trump's first term.

The Supreme Court ruled that a Rastafari man cannot sue Louisiana prison guards for forcibly cutting his dreadlocks, stating a federal law protecting inmates' religious rights does not permit lawsuits for monetary damages. The court acknowledged the violation but agreed with lower courts that the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act cannot hold prison officials financially liable.

Louisiana Republicans have declined to join other Southern states in pursuing redistricting efforts, avoiding the contentious debates seen in previous congressional map discussions. The U.S. Supreme Court's Callais decision, which challenges majority-minority districts, has raised concerns about potential threats to Democratic representation in Louisiana, but legislative leaders say no redistricting plans are underway before the 2030 census.

Telehealth access to the abortion pill mifepristone is critical for domestic violence survivors, as highlighted by two women who credit medication abortion with enabling them to escape abusive relationships. A Louisiana lawsuit challenges the FDA's 2023 rule allowing telehealth prescriptions, with courts temporarily blocking and reinstating the rule during ongoing legal proceedings.

Telehealth access to abortion pills is critical for domestic violence survivors, as highlighted by two women who used medication abortions to escape abusive relationships. A Louisiana lawsuit challenges the FDA's 2023 rule allowing telehealth prescriptions for mifepristone, with courts temporarily blocking and then reinstating the rule amid ongoing legal battles.

Telehealth access to the abortion pill mifepristone is critical for domestic violence survivors, as highlighted by personal accounts of Kaelah Oberdorf and Carrie Frail, who relied on medication abortions during abusive relationships. A Louisiana lawsuit challenges the FDA's 2023 rule allowing telehealth prescriptions, with courts temporarily blocking the rule before the Supreme Court paused the decision.