lawyer

WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Monday ordered the government to return to the U.S. a California DACA recipient who was deported last month to Mexico.

U.S. District Judge Dena Coggins in Sacramento gave the government seven days to return Maria de Jesus Estrada Juarez, 42, and restore her protections under the Obama-era program Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, “as if her Feb. 19, 2026 removal never occurred.”

A lawyer for Estrada Juarez argued that she was unlawfully deported within a day of appearing at a scheduled immigration appointment in Sacramento.

Lawyers for the government, meanwhile, argued that the court lacked jurisdiction over Estrada Juarez’s case because her petition was filed after she was deported and because her removal was a discretionary decision the government is entitled to.

Coggins said she found the government’s argument “unavailing,” writing in her ruling that Estrada Juarez “was removed in flagrant violation of the regulatory protections afforded to her under DACA, and in violation of the Constitutional protections afforded to her under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.”

In a statement, Estrada Juarez said she was “overwhelmed with relief and hope” after learning the court’s decision.

The Department of Homeland Security said it had reinstated an expedited removal order for Estrada Juarez from 1998, when she was 15. But her lawyer, Stacy Tolchin, said the record showed that the order lacked supervisory approval and was never finalized, so there was no valid removal order to reinstate.

Homeland Security previously told The Times that an immigration judge had ordered Estrada Juarez’s deportation in 1998 “and she was removed from the United States shortly after.” Tolchin said Estrada Juarez never saw an immigration judge.

Estrada Juarez, who worked as a regional manager for Motel 6, has had protection from deportation under DACA since 2013. She applied for legal permanent residency, or a green card, through her daughter, Damaris Bello, 22, who is a U.S. citizen.

Her deportation after the green card interview garnered public attention and outrage from members of Congress, including Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.).

Tolchin filed the lawsuit seeking her return on March 10.

DACA was created to protect undocumented people who were brought to the U.S. as children.

As of June 2025, there were more than 515,000 DACA recipients, known as “Dreamers,” in the U.S. California has 144,000 DACA recipients, the most of any state, according to federal data.

A jury found Ye, the controversial music impresario formerly known as Kanye West, liable in the legal dispute brought by his former contractor and ordered him to pay $140,000.

Tony Saxon, who also worked as Ye’s security guard and caretaker at the Malibu property, sued the rapper in Los Angeles Superior Court in September 2023, claiming a slate of labor violations, nonpayment of services and disability discrimination.

The $140,000 judgment announced Wednesday is far less than the $1.7 million in damages that Saxon’s lawyers had originally requested. Ye will also have to pay for Saxon’s legal fees, which is expected to put the total sum that West will have to pay at more than $1 million.

Although Saxon’s attorneys at the Los Angeles-based firm West Coast Trial Lawyers called the verdict a “mixed” one, they characterized it as as a “vindication for our client.”

“Ye’s lawyers called him a liar, a fraud, and a malingerer in court. His medical records, bank records, and personal family history were dissected, mocked, and vilified,” said attorney Ronald Zambrano in a statement.

“In true David-vs.-Goliath fashion, Mr. Saxon stood firm against one of the biggest celebrities in the world, with the truth on his side,” Zambrano said.

Saxon alleged that while working as a security guard on the property, he was forced to sleep on the floor and was fired in November 2021 for failing to comply with Ye’s “dangerous requests.” He also said that he frequently complained to West about these and other issues, but that the rapper failed to address them.

In a statement, Ye’s spokesperson noted the jury had “rejected almost all of his [Saxon’s ] claims,” and that Saxon only recovered “a small fraction of what his lawyers demanded.”

“The jury also found that Saxon acted in the capacity of a contractor and did not qualify for the employee exception under California’s contractor licensing statutes,” according to the statement. “We believe the damages award is legally barred and we’ll be seeking post-trial relief from the court.”

Ye purchased the beachfront concrete mansion in 2021— designed by Pritzker Prize-winning Japanese architect Tadao Ando — for $57.3 million. He then gutted the property on Malibu Road, reportedly saying, “This is going to be my bomb shelter. This is going to be my Batcave.”

Three years later, the hip-hop star sold the unfinished mansion (he had removed the windows, doors, electricity and plumbing and broke down walls), at a significant loss to developer Steven Belmont’s Belwood Investments for $21 million.

In court filings Ye denied Saxon’s allegations. In a November 2023 response to the complaint, he disputed that Saxon “has sustained any injury, damage, or loss by reason of any act, omission or breach by Defendant.”

In January, Ye sued Saxon and his law firm over a $1.8 million lien placed on the Malibu mansion, alleging they “wrongfully” placed an “invalid” lien on the property “while simultaneously launching an aggressive publicity campaign designed to pressure Ye, chill prospective transactions, and extract payment on disputed claims already being litigated in court.”

The Malibu mansion that Ye purchased and gutted was later purchased and restored to its original design.

(The Oppenheim Group / Roger Davies)

That case is pending.

Ye’s spokesperson said the lien “clouded the home’s title and interfered with its sale, destroying substantial value at the time of sale.”

In recent years, the mercurial superstar has faced a number of public and legal dramas.

In 2022, Ye lost numerous lucrative partnerships with companies like Adidas and the Gap, following a raft of antisemitic statements, including declaring himself a Nazi on X (which he later recanted).

Two years later, Ye abruptly shut down Donda Academy, the troubled private school he founded in 2020.

Ye, the school and some of his affiliated businesses faced multiple lawsuits from former employees and educators, alleging they were victims of wrongful termination, a hostile work environment and other claims.

In court filings, Ye has denied each of the claims made against him by former employees and educators at Donda.

Several of those suits have been settled.

WASHINGTON  — The Supreme Court agreed Monday to decide on shielding energy producers from dozens of lawsuits seeking to hold them liable for costs of global climate change.

In the past decade, dozens of cities, counties and states, including California, have joined state-based lawsuits that seek billions of dollars in damages, and they have won preliminary victories in state courts.

But the Trump administration and the energy producers urged the Supreme Court to throw out all of these suits on the grounds they conflict with federal law.

“Boulder Colorado cannot make energy policy for the entire country,” lawyers for Suncor Energy and Exxon Mobil said in their appeal. They urged the court to rule that “state law cannot impose the costs of global climate change on a subset of the world’s energy producers chosen by a single municipality.”

The justices will hear the case of Suncor Energy vs. Boulder County, but arguments will not be held until October.

The Biden administration had said the justices should stand aside while the lawsuits move forward in state courts, but the Trump administration filed a brief in September urging the court to intervene now.

They said the case has “vast nationwide significance,” and it should not be left to be decided state by state.

Lawyers for Boulder had urged the court against taking up the issue at an early stage of the litigation. “This is not the right time or the right case for deciding” whether municipalities can sue over the damage they have suffered.

But after weighing the issue for weeks, the court announced it will be hear the claims of the oil and gas industries.