Latest news with #UniversityofHoustonLawCenter
NBC News
30-07-2025
- NBC News
Texas man is charged in killing of Afghan refugee who fought alongside Green Berets
A Texas man has been charged with murder in the killing of an Afghan father who spent years fighting alongside U.S. Green Berets in Afghanistan. The suspect, Katia Trevon Bougere, 31, was charged with shooting Abdul Rahman Waziri, also 31, in a dispute over parking in Houston. But Bougere hasn't been arrested. Instead, he received a summons to appear in court next week, as if it were a traffic violation. It's the latest bizarre turn in a case that has sparked protests in Houston and prompted Green Berets to write letters to public officials demanding justice for their fallen former comrade. 'This indictment is just the beginning of the justice the Waziri family deserves,' said their attorney, Omar Khawaja. 'A husband and father was senselessly killed, and while we are grateful the grand jury returned a murder charge, it is outrageous that the man accused of taking his life is being allowed to appear by summons — not arrested, not handcuffed, not treated like the violent offender he is alleged to be.' Asked why prosecutors didn't issue an arrest warrant, a spokeswoman for the Harris County district attorney's office responded with a brief statement. 'After a grand jury indicted the defendant, the clerk's office issued a summons and he's required to appear in court,' the statement read. Efforts to reach Bougere were not successful, and it was not immediately clear if he had hired an attorney. For five years, Waziri served in an elite unit tasked with helping to protect Green Berets in Afghanistan. He made it to the U.S. in 2021 and settled in Houston with his wife and two young daughters, only to be gunned down outside his apartment complex, Houston police said. The gunman spoke to police officers at the scene but was let go without being charged, police said. Three months passed with no updates from law enforcement officials. But on Monday, a Houston grand jury returned an indictment charging Bougere with felony murder, according to a copy obtained by NBC News. The charging documents include a 'request for summons' that calls on Bougere to appear in court at 9 a.m. next Tuesday, Aug. 5. 'Failure to appear will result in a warrant being issued for your arrest,' it states. David Kwok, an associate professor of law at the University of Houston Law Center, said state law allows for prosecutors to request a summons rather than an arrest warrant even for people accused of murder and other violent crimes. But it was unclear to him why the Harris County district attorney's office would make such a decision in this case. 'It certainly provokes a lot of questions,' he said. Eddie Cortes, a veteran defense attorney in Houston who has no connection to this case, said it is an unusual course of action but it typically comes down to whether the defendant has hired a lawyer who is known to prosecutors. "They're not going to do this with somebody who is just Joe Blow off the street," said Cortes. "But they will if the guy has counsel, and he's a well-respected longtime defense attorney here in town." Bougere hails from the Los Angeles area, according to online records, and he competed in the high jump at Lynwood High School. In 2020, he filed paperwork in Texas to launch a company called Black Kartier Militia LLC, according to state records. No other information was immediately available. The fatal shooting took place on the evening of April 27. Just before 9:10 p.m., Waziri drove into the parking lot of his apartment complex and hopped out of his Toyota Camry, according to surveillance footage provided to NBC News by the family's attorney. A man pulled up in a car behind his vehicle, leading to a confrontation that ended with Waziri lying on the ground, with multiple gunshot wounds. The surveillance footage did not capture the shooting or the moments beforehand, but the other man was seen calmly walking away afterward. Waziri was unarmed at the time, according to Khawaja, his family's lawyer. Houston police said in a statement that responding officers were approached at the scene by a man who identified himself as the shooter and said he and Waziri were 'arguing over parking.' Officers interviewed the man and took possession of his gun but then let him go. The spokeswoman for the district attorney's office told NBC News in May that prosecutors were waiting for additional information from investigators before deciding whether to bring charges. Abdullah Khan, Waziri's brother, said that he was 'very happy' with the grand jury's decision, but that he doesn't understand why it took so long for the suspect to be charged. 'It's really strange to me,' Khan said. 'Why did they not do this already with the evidence they had?'
Yahoo
14-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump's case for sending troops to help ICE involves precedent from Fugitive Slave Act
Despite a stinging rebuke from a federal judge Thursday, military forces deployed in Los Angeles will remain under presidential control through the weekend, setting up a series of high-stakes showdowns. On the streets of Los Angeles, protesters will continue to be met with platoons of armed soldiers. State and local officials remain in open conflict with the president. And in the courts, Trump administration lawyers are digging deep into case law in search of archaic statutes that can be cited to justify the ongoing federal crackdown — including constitutional maneuvers invented to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. Many legal scholars say the current battle over Los Angeles is a test case for powers the White House has long hoped to wield — not just squelching protest or big-footing blue state leaders, but stretching presidential authority to its legal limit. "A lot rides on what happens this weekend," said Christopher Mirasola, a professor at the University of Houston Law Center. By staying the order that would have delivered control of most troops back to California leaders until after the weekend, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals left the Trump administration in command of thousands of National Guard troops and hundreds of Marines ahead of the nationwide "No Kings" protests planned for Saturday. Read more: Los Angeles braces for weekend of 'No Kings' protests The Trump administration claimed in court that it had the authority to deploy troops to L.A. due to protesters preventing ICE agents from arresting and deporting unauthorized immigrants — and because demonstrations downtown amounted to "rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States." But U.S. District Court Judge Charles Breyer of San Francisco wrote Thursday that Trump had steamrolled state leaders when he federalized California's troops and deployed them against protesters. "His actions were illegal — both exceeding the scope of his statutory authority and violating the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution," Breyer wrote. While ICE "was not able to detain as many people as Defendants believe it could have," it was still able to uphold U.S. immigration law without the military's help, Breyer ruled. A few belligerents among thousands of peaceful protesters did not make an insurrection, he added. "The idea that protesters can so quickly cross the line between protected conduct and 'rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States' is untenable and dangerous," the judge wrote. The 9th Circuit stayed Breyer's ruling hours after he issued a temporary restraining order that would have allowed California leaders to withdraw the National Guard soldiers from L.A. The pause will remain in effect until at least Tuesday when a three-judge panel — made up of two appointed by President Trump and one by former President Biden — will hear arguments over whether the troops can remain under federal direction. The court battle has drawn on precedents that stretch back to the foundation of the country, offering starkly contrasting visions of federal authority and states' rights. The last time the president federalized the National Guard over the objections of a state governor was in 1965 when President Lyndon B. Johnson sent troops to protect Martin Luther King Jr. and the Selma to Montgomery March in defiance of then-Gov. George Wallace. Read more: Fears of ICE raids upend life in L.A. County, from schools to Home Depot parking lots But sending troops in to assist ICE has less in common with Johnson's move than it does with President Millard Fillmore's actions a century earlier, Mirasola said. Beginning in 1850, the Houston law professor said, Fillmore sent troops to accompany federal marshals seeking to apprehend escaped slaves who had fled north. Trump's arguments to deploy the National Guard and Marines in support of federal immigration enforcement efforts rely on the same principle, drawn from the "take care" clause of Article II of the Constitution, Mirasola said. He noted that anger over the military's repeated clashes with civilians helped stoke the flames that led to the Civil War. "Much of the population actively opposed enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Act," the professor said. Some analysts believe Trump strategically chose immigration as the issue through which to advance his version of the so-called "unitary executive theory," a legal doctrine that says the legislature has no power and the judiciary has no right to interfere with how the president wields control of the executive branch. "It's not a coincidence that we're seeing immigration be the flash point," said Ming Hsu Chen, a professor at the UCSF Law School. "Someone who wants to exert strong federal power over immigration would see L.A. as a highly symbolic place, a ground zero to show their authority." Chen, who heads the Race, Immigration, Citizenship, and Equality Program at UCSF Law, said it's clear Trump and his advisers have a "vision of how ICE can be emboldened." "He's putting that on steroids," Chen said. "He's folding together many different kinds of excesses of executive power as though they were the same thing." Some experts point out that Judge Breyer's order is limited only to California, which means that until it's fully litigated — a process that can drag on for weeks or months — the president may attempt similar moves elsewhere. "The president could try the same thing in another jurisdiction," said Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Liberty and National Security Program at NYU's Brennan Center for Justice. "President Trump's memorandum to deploy troops in Los Angeles made it very clear he thinks it's appropriate … wherever protests are occurring," Goitein said. "He certainly seems to think that even peaceful protests can be met with force." Experts said Breyer's ruling set a high bar for what may be considered "rebellion" under the law, making it harder — if it is allowed to stand on appeal — for the administration to credibly claim one is afoot in L.A. "It's hard to imagine that whatever we see over the weekend is going to be an organized, armed attempt to overthrow the government," Goitein said. The Trump administration, meanwhile, hasn't budged from its insistence that extreme measures are needed to restore order and protect federal agents as they go about their work. Read more: L.A. law enforcement leaders walk tightrope amid immigration crackdown "The rioters will not stop or slow ICE down from arresting criminal illegal aliens," the Department of Homeland Security said in a news release this week, which included mugshots of several alleged criminals who had been arrested. "Murderers, pedophiles, and drug traffickers. These are the types of criminal illegal aliens that rioters are fighting to protect." Even after the 9th Circuit decision, the issue could still be headed to the Supreme Court. Some legal scholars fear Trump might defy the court if he keeps losing. Others say he may be content with the havoc wrought while doomed cases wend their way through the justice system. "It's a strange thing for me to say as a law professor that maybe the law doesn't matter," Chen said. "I don't know that [Trump] particularly cares that he's doing something illegal." Times staff writer Sandra McDonald contributed to this report. Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
14-06-2025
- Politics
- Los Angeles Times
Trump's case for sending troops to help ICE involves precedent from Fugitive Slave Act
Despite a stinging rebuke from a federal judge Thursday, military forces deployed in Los Angeles will remain under presidential control through the weekend, setting up a series of high-stakes showdowns. On the streets of Los Angeles, protesters will continue to be met with platoons of armed soldiers. State and local officials remain in open conflict with the president. And in the courts, Trump administration lawyers are digging deep into case law in search of archaic statutes that can be cited to justify the ongoing federal crackdown — including constitutional maneuvers invented to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. Many legal scholars say the current battle over Los Angeles is a test case for powers the White House has long hoped to wield — not just squelching protest or big-footing blue state leaders, but stretching presidential authority to its legal limit. 'A lot rides on what happens this weekend,' said Christopher Mirasola, a professor at the University of Houston Law Center. By staying the order that would have delivered control of most troops back to California leaders until after the weekend, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals left the Trump administration in command of thousands of National Guard troops and hundreds of Marines ahead of the nationwide 'No Kings' protests planned for Saturday. The Trump administration claimed in court that it had the authority to deploy troops to L.A. due to protesters preventing ICE agents from arresting and deporting unauthorized immigrants — and because demonstrations downtown amounted to 'rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.' But U.S. District Court Judge Charles Breyer of San Francisco wrote Thursday that Trump had steamrolled state leaders when he federalized California's troops and deployed them against protesters. 'His actions were illegal — both exceeding the scope of his statutory authority and violating the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution,' Breyer wrote. While ICE 'was not able to detain as many people as Defendants believe it could have,' it was still able to uphold U.S. immigration law without the military's help, Breyer ruled. A few belligerents among thousands of peaceful protesters did not make an insurrection, he added. 'The idea that protesters can so quickly cross the line between protected conduct and 'rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States' is untenable and dangerous,' the judge wrote. The 9th Circuit stayed Breyer's ruling hours after he issued a temporary restraining order that would have allowed California leaders to withdraw the National Guard soldiers from L.A. The pause will remain in effect until at least Tuesday when a three-judge panel — made up of two appointed by President Trump and one by former President Biden — will hear arguments over whether the troops can remain under federal direction. The court battle has drawn on precedents that stretch back to the foundation of the country, offering starkly contrasting visions of federal authority and states' rights. The last time the president federalized the National Guard over the objections of a state governor was in 1965 when President Lyndon B. Johnson sent troops to protect Martin Luther King Jr. and the Selma to Montgomery March in defiance of then-Gov. George Wallace. But sending troops in to assist ICE has less in common with Johnson's move than it does with President Millard Fillmore's actions a century earlier, Mirasola said. Beginning in 1850, the Houston law professor said, Fillmore sent troops to accompany federal marshals seeking to apprehend escaped slaves who had fled north. Trump's arguments to deploy the National Guard and Marines in support of federal immigration enforcement efforts rely on the same principle, drawn from the 'take care' clause of Article II of the Constitution, Mirasola said. He noted that anger over the military's repeated clashes with civilians helped stoke the flames that led to the Civil War. 'Much of the population actively opposed enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Act,' the professor said. Some analysts believe Trump strategically chose immigration as the issue through which to advance his version of the so-called 'unitary executive theory,' a legal doctrine that says the legislature has no power and the judiciary has no right to interfere with how the president wields control of the executive branch. 'It's not a coincidence that we're seeing immigration be the flash point,' said Ming Hsu Chen, a professor at the UCSF Law School. 'Someone who wants to exert strong federal power over immigration would see L.A. as a highly symbolic place, a ground zero to show their authority.' Chen, who heads the Race, Immigration, Citizenship, and Equality Program at UCSF Law, said it's clear Trump and his advisers have a 'vision of how ICE can be emboldened.' 'He's putting that on steroids,' Chen said. 'He's folding together many different kinds of excesses of executive power as though they were the same thing.' Some experts point out that Judge Breyer's order is limited only to California, which means that until it's fully litigated — a process that can drag on for weeks or months — the president may attempt similar moves elsewhere. 'The president could try the same thing in another jurisdiction,' said Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Liberty and National Security Program at NYU's Brennan Center for Justice. 'President Trump's memorandum to deploy troops in Los Angeles made it very clear he thinks it's appropriate … wherever protests are occurring,' Goitein said. 'He certainly seems to think that even peaceful protests can be met with force.' Experts said Breyer's ruling set a high bar for what may be considered 'rebellion' under the law, making it harder — if it is allowed to stand on appeal — for the administration to credibly claim one is afoot in L.A. 'It's hard to imagine that whatever we see over the weekend is going to be an organized, armed attempt to overthrow the government,' Goitein said. The Trump administration, meanwhile, hasn't budged from its insistence that extreme measures are needed to restore order and protect federal agents as they go about their work. 'The rioters will not stop or slow ICE down from arresting criminal illegal aliens,' the Department of Homeland Security said in a news release this week, which included mugshots of several alleged criminals who had been arrested. 'Murderers, pedophiles, and drug traffickers. These are the types of criminal illegal aliens that rioters are fighting to protect.' Even after the 9th Circuit decision, the issue could still be headed to the Supreme Court. Some legal scholars fear Trump might defy the court if he keeps losing. Others say he may be content with the havoc wrought while doomed cases wend their way through the justice system. 'It's a strange thing for me to say as a law professor that maybe the law doesn't matter,' Chen said. 'I don't know that [Trump] particularly cares that he's doing something illegal.' Times staff writer Sandra McDonald contributed to this report.
Malaysian Reserve
13-06-2025
- Business
- Malaysian Reserve
UH Law Center's Professor Chandler Launches "AI for Legal Education" Blog to Guide the Next Generation of Lawyers
HOUSTON, June 13, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — For a law student in 2025, is refusing to use Artificial Intelligence the same as a 1990s student refusing to use a computer? University of Houston Law Center Foundation Professor Seth J. Chandler argues it is, and he has launched a new blog, AI for Legal Education, as an essential guide for students, faculty, and alumni navigating this new reality. The blog ( directly addresses the challenges and opportunities of AI, contending that students not actively using these tools risk a significant disadvantage in their studies and their careers. In his post, 'If I Were a Law Student Today,' Chandler outlines a core toolkit and workflow for using AI to learn more deeply, manage information, and prepare for a legal profession that is rapidly adopting AI for research, drafting, and analysis. While providing a roadmap for students is a key focus, the blog offers practical resources for the entire legal community. Chandler takes an 'educator-first' perspective, demonstrating through actionable posts how AI can augment—not replace—legal expertise. Content on the blog is designed for immediate application, with posts that include: A Modern Student's Playbook: Outlining the essential AI toolkit for today's law students and arguing that AI proficiency is now a core competency for a legal career. Actionable Workflows for Experts: A step-by-step demonstration of how to use AI to analyze a complex Supreme Court opinion and prepare media-ready commentary in under 30 minutes. Practical, Accessible Tutorials: Guides on building custom AI assistants ('Gems' or 'CustomGPTs') without needing to be a programmer. As Chandler notes, 'English is the new programming language.' Bringing decades of experience in mathematics, computer science, and law, Chandler aims to create a space 'to think seriously, and sometimes playfully, about how the world of legal education is changing.' He encourages the UH Law Center community and others to engage with the project by subscribing (at no charge) to the blog, emphasizing that AI integration is no longer a distant hypothetical. The blog is a resource for students aiming to enter the workforce with a decisive advantage, faculty seeking to enhance their teaching, and alumni navigating a changing professional landscape. To read the latest posts, subscribe for updates, and join the conversation, visit * In keeping with Professor Chandler's philosophy, this press release is itself a collaboration of humans and AI. If you are interested in interviewing Seth Chandler, please contact Carrie Anna Criado, UH Law Center Assistant Dean of Communications and Marketing, 713-743-2184, cacriado@ OR Rashda Khan, Communications Director, 325-656-2824, rkhan20@ About the University of Houston Law Center The University of Houston Law Center (UHLC) is a dynamic, top-tier law school located in the nation's 4th largest city. UHLC's Health Law, Intellectual Property Law, and Part-time programs rank in the U.S. News Top 10. UH Law Center awards Doctor of Jurisprudence (J.D.) and Master of Laws (LL.M.) degrees, through its academic branch, the College of Law. The Law Center is more than just a law school. It is a powerful hub of intellectual activity with more than 12 centers, institutes and programs that fuel its educational mission and national reputation. UHLC is fully accredited by the American Bar Association and is a member of the Association of American Law Schools. About the University of Houston The University of Houston is a Carnegie-designated Tier One public research university recognized with a Phi Beta Kappa chapter for excellence in undergraduate education. UH serves the globally competitive Houston and Gulf Coast Region by providing world-class faculty, experiential learning and strategic industry partnerships. Located in the nation's fourth-largest city and one of the most ethnically and culturally diverse regions in the country, UH is a federally designated Hispanic- and Asian-American-Serving institution with enrollment of more than 47,000 students. Online Story Media Contact:Rashda Khan713-743-7587rkhan20@
