EPISODE · Jun 5, 2026
Case Explained: SILVIA LORENA BONILLA-DE JANDRES v. TODD BLANCHE, Acting Attorney General O R D E R Based on the government’s representation that it has no current plans for removal the motion for stay of removal is denied. This denial is without prejudice to petitioner’s ability to file a new motion for stay of removal if the government’s plans change Judge Wilkinson and Judge Heytens voted to deny the motion. Judge Wynn voted to grant the motion and wrote a statement dissenting from the denial of the motion For the Court /s/ Nwam
from DIFTCL: Federal Narrative Summaries · host Do It For The Caselaw
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-05 The fourth-circuit denied the petitioner’s motion for a stay of removal based on the government’s representation that it has no current plans to effectuate the removal. The court noted that this denial is without prejudice, allowing the petitioner to file a new motion if the government’s plans change. While Judges Wilkinson and Heytens voted to deny the motion, Judge Wynn dissented, arguing that the stay should have been granted to preserve the status quo given the uncertainty of future removal proceedings. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.
Embed this episode
Ready to play
Case Explained: SILVIA LORENA BONILLA-DE JANDRES v. TODD BLANCHE, Acting Attorney General O R D E R Based on the government’s representation that it has no current plans for removal the motion for stay of removal is denied. This denial is without prejudice to petitioner’s ability to file a new motion for stay of removal if the government’s plans change Judge Wilkinson and Judge Heytens voted to deny the motion. Judge Wynn voted to grant the motion and wrote a statement dissenting from the denial of the motion For the Court /s/ Nwam
No transcript for this episode yet
Similar Episodes
No similar episodes found.
Similar Podcasts
No similar podcasts found.