Daily Digest — 2026-08-15

No Congressional Record issue was observed on this day. The Record for a day's proceedings is typically published by govinfo the following morning; it appears in the digest for the day it is observed (how our clocks work).

1.1 Senate

No Senate floor items met the selection thresholds. 0 floor granule(s) are accounted for in the Coverage Statement.

1.2 House of Representatives

No House floor items met the selection thresholds. 0 floor granule(s) are accounted for in the Coverage Statement.

1.3 Recorded Votes

No recorded votes were published in this issue of the Congressional Record.

Source: Congressional Bills (BILLS), text versions published 2026-08-15 to 2026-08-15.

2.1 Counts by Stage

2.2 Bills Listed by Mechanical Rule

Bills below are listed because they matched at least one listing rule; the matching rule is stated per item. All other bill texts are counted above and accounted for in the Coverage Statement.

No bill texts published in this range matched a listing rule; all 0 are accounted for in the Coverage Statement.

Source: Federal Register (FR), issue of 2026-08-15.

3.1 Counts by Document Type

3.2 Rules Published

No rules were published in this issue.

3.3 Proposed Rules Published

No proposed rules were published in this issue.

3.4 Notices and Presidential Documents

Notices are summarized only when they match a listing rule; all are counted in 3.1 and in the Coverage Statement. Presidential documents in the FR are always listed.

No notices or presidential documents matched a listing rule.

legislativealien custody (model-generated key)public law (model-generated key)theft offenses (model-generated key)

In plain terms One new law, Public Law 119–1 (the "Laken Riley Act"), requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to take custody of certain aliens charged with or convicted of specific theft-related offenses.

Source: Public and Private Laws (PLAW) published 2026-08-15.

• Public Law 119–1 — Public Law 119–1: To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to take into custody aliens who have been charged in the United States with theft, and for other purposes. — Public Law 119–1, known as the "Laken Riley Act," amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to require the Secretary of Homeland Security to take into custody certain aliens. This applies to aliens charged with or convicted of specific theft-related offenses or crimes resulting in death or serious bodily injury, who are also inadmissible under particular immigration provisions. The law further grants State attorneys general or authorized State officers standing to bring actions against federal officials for alleged violations of certain immigration detention, removal, visa, or parole requirements if the State or its residents experience harm. Approved: 2025-01-29.
• In plain terms Public Law 119–1 requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to detain certain aliens charged with or convicted of theft or violent crimes, and lets state officials sue federal officials for immigration rule violations harming their state or residents.
• Included because: PLAW-SEL-01 — enacted into law (all public and private laws are listed) (document dated 2025-01-29)
• Source: PLAW-119publ1 (opens in a new tab)

Source: United States Courts Opinions (USCOURTS): opinions observed 2026-08-15 by our collector; each opinion states its own issue date beside its listing (how our clocks work).

Completeness disclosure (standing): USCOURTS carries opinions from approximately 140 participating appellate, district, bankruptcy, and national federal courts. Unlike the Congressional Record and the Federal Register, which are the complete official record of their branches, USCOURTS is participation-based and is NOT the complete federal judicial record. Courts post opinions with delay — typically over several days — so a day's digest carries the opinions that became available that day, whatever date each was issued.

5.1 Appellate and National Court Opinions

judicialjudicial items (model-generated key)petition denial (model-generated key)sentence affirmance (model-generated key)

In plain terms Today's 34 judicial items include the Ninth Circuit reversing an order that quashed a DOJ subpoena to QueerDoc, with others largely affirming sentences, denying petitions, or ruling on civil disputes.

Appellate and national court opinions are summarized; district and bankruptcy opinions are counted in 5.2 and in the Coverage Statement.

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

• Ramona Matos Rodriguez, et al v. Pan American Health Organization, et al (No. 24-07135; filed 2026-08-14) — The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit dismissed an appeal by the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) for lack of jurisdiction. PAHO sought immediate review of a district court discovery order in a case where Cuban doctors sued PAHO alleging cooperation in a human trafficking scheme. The court concluded that the discovery order was not a "final" decision under the collateral order doctrine, preventing immediate appellate review.
• In plain terms The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the Pan American Health Organization's appeal of a discovery order for lack of authority, ruling it was not a final decision eligible for immediate review.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-caDC-24-07135 / USCOURTS-caDC-24-07135-0 (opens in a new tab)

United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

• Astrid Matias-Pablo, et al v. Todd Blanche (No. 25-02021; filed 2026-08-14) — The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued an opinion and entered judgment in the case of Astrid Matias-Pablo, et al v. Todd Blanche. The court informed counsel of the 45-day deadline for filing petitions for rehearing or rehearing en banc.
• In plain terms The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its decision in Astrid Matias-Pablo's case and set a 45-day deadline for lawyers to request a rehearing.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca8-25-02021 / USCOURTS-ca8-25-02021-0 (opens in a new tab)

United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

• USA v. Ricardo Villanueva-Martinez (No. 24-12208; filed 2026-08-14) — The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the sentence of Ricardo Villanueva-Martinez for illegal reentry following removal. Villanueva-Martinez had appealed, arguing that the district court erred in denying him a downward departure and that his sentence was substantively unreasonable. The appellate court concluded it lacked jurisdiction over the downward departure argument and determined that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the sentence.
• In plain terms The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Ricardo Villanueva-Martinez's sentence for illegal reentry, ruling it lacked authority on one appeal point and that the trial court acted properly.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca11-24-12208 / USCOURTS-ca11-24-12208-0 (opens in a new tab)
• Scott Cartlidge v. Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Admini (No. 25-12376; filed 2026-08-14) — The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a district court's order upholding the Social Security Administration's denial of benefits to Scott Cartlidge. Cartlidge had argued that the administrative law judge erred in assessing his residual functional capacity by not including a limitation that he would miss three days of work per month. The appellate court concluded that the administrative law judge provided sufficient reasons for not fully crediting Cartlidge's subjective testimony, finding it inconsistent with other medical evidence in the record.
• In plain terms The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the denial of Social Security benefits to Scott Cartlidge, finding the judge gave sufficient reasons for not fully believing his testimony about missing three work days monthly.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca11-25-12376 / USCOURTS-ca11-25-12376-0 (opens in a new tab)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

• Jacki Easlick, LLC v. CJ Emerald (No. 24-01538; filed 2026-08-14) — The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed two district court decisions concerning a design patent infringement case brought by Jacki Easlick, LLC. The appeals related to the denial of Jacki Easlick's motion for a preliminary injunction and the denial of its motion for reconsideration against AccEncyc US. The appellate court found no abuse of discretion, agreeing with the district court's assessment that Jacki Easlick had not established a likelihood of success on the merits based on differences between the ornamental features of the patented and accused designs.
• In plain terms The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals upheld two lower court decisions, finding Jacki Easlick, LLC did not show likely success in its design patent infringement case against AccEncyc US.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca13-24-01538 / USCOURTS-ca13-24-01538-0 (opens in a new tab)

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

• Holberg v. Guerrero (No. 21-70010; filed 2023-03-13) — The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals granted in part Brittany Marlowe Holberg's request for a certificate of appealability (COA) in her federal habeas corpus case. The court determined that reasonable jurists could debate the district court's resolution of her ineffective assistance of counsel and Brady claims, specifically regarding a witness's undisclosed status as a paid police informant. It affirmed the district court's application of deference to state court findings and its denial of discovery.
• In plain terms The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals partly granted Brittany Marlowe Holberg's appeal, finding debateable issues with ineffective counsel and an undisclosed paid informant, but upheld other lower court decisions.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca5-21-70010 / USCOURTS-ca5-21-70010-0 (opens in a new tab)
• Holberg v. Guerrero (No. 21-70010; filed 2025-03-07) — The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and vacated Brittany Marlowe Holberg's capital murder conviction and remanded the case for further proceedings. The court determined that the State violated Holberg's right to due process by failing to disclose that a critical trial witness was a paid informant. This non-disclosure of impeachment evidence constituted a Brady violation.
• In plain terms The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Brittany Marlowe Holberg's murder conviction and sent the case back, finding the state violated her rights by not revealing a key witness was a paid informant.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca5-21-70010 / USCOURTS-ca5-21-70010-1 (opens in a new tab)
• Holberg v. Guerrero (No. 21-70010; filed 2026-08-14) — The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, affirmed the judgment of the district court by an equally divided vote. This decision means the previous panel opinion reversing and vacating Brittany Marlowe Holberg's conviction is superseded, and the district court's denial of habeas relief stands. A concurring opinion stated that the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) bars Holberg's claims.
• In plain terms The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, with all judges, affirmed the district court's decision by an equally divided vote, meaning Brittany Holberg's conviction stands and she is denied release.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca5-21-70010 / USCOURTS-ca5-21-70010-2 (opens in a new tab)

United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

• US v. Earl Griffin, Jr. (No. 22-04257; filed 2026-08-14) — The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed a district court's denial of a motion to suppress evidence in the case of United States v. Earl Leroy Griffin, Jr. The appellate court concluded that the affidavit supporting the search warrant for a residence and vehicles lacked probable cause. The court found that the affidavit failed to establish a sufficient connection between the alleged drug activity and the specific place to be searched, and that much of the information presented was outdated.
• In plain terms The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower court's refusal to block evidence in Earl Leroy Griffin, Jr.'s case, finding the search warrant affidavit lacked enough reason and had outdated information.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca4-22-04257 / USCOURTS-ca4-22-04257-0 (opens in a new tab)
• Alyse Sanchez v. Markwayne Mullin (No. 24-01487; filed 2026-08-14) — The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit vacated a district court's judgment in a case involving noncitizens eligible for provisional unlawful presence waivers. The plaintiffs alleged the government lacked authority to remove them while their waiver applications were pending and that arrests occurred at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services offices. The appellate court determined that the plaintiffs were not entitled to summary judgment on the existing record and remanded the case for further proceedings.
• In plain terms The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower court's decision on noncitizens with pending provisional waivers, sending the case back as plaintiffs were not yet entitled to a judgment in their favor.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca4-24-01487 / USCOURTS-ca4-24-01487-0 (opens in a new tab)
• US v. Willie Hicks (No. 24-04125; filed 2026-08-14) — The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions of Willie Lamont Hicks for wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Hicks had appealed from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. The court found no error in the proceedings below and issued an unpublished per curiam opinion.
• In plain terms The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Willie Lamont Hicks's convictions for wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud, finding no errors in the original court proceedings.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca4-24-04125 / USCOURTS-ca4-24-04125-0 (opens in a new tab)
• US v. Mary Mendoza (No. 24-04127; filed 2026-08-14) — The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions of Mary Ann Mendoza for wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Mendoza had appealed from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland alongside Willie Lamont Hicks. The court found no error in the proceedings below and issued an unpublished per curiam opinion.
• In plain terms The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Mary Ann Mendoza's convictions for wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud, finding no errors in the original court proceedings.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca4-24-04127 / USCOURTS-ca4-24-04127-0 (opens in a new tab)
• US v. Danny Roney (No. 24-04556; filed 2026-08-14) — The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the revocation of Danny Roney's conditional discharge under 18 U.S.C. § 4243. Roney was found not guilty by reason of insanity and had violated a condition of his discharge prohibiting weapon possession. The court held that revocation is permissible only for failure to comply with a prescribed treatment regimen, concluding Roney's violation was part of his regimen.
• In plain terms The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the cancellation of Danny Roney's conditional release, finding his weapon possession violated a prescribed treatment rule for those found not guilty by reason of insanity.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca4-24-04556 / USCOURTS-ca4-24-04556-0 (opens in a new tab)
• Wanrong Lin v. Markwayne Mullin (No. 24-06520; filed 2026-08-14) — The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated and remanded a district court judgment that had enjoined the government from arresting or removing noncitizen plaintiffs with pending provisional unlawful presence waiver applications. The plaintiffs alleged the government lacked legal authority for such actions during the waiver process. The appellate court concluded that the plaintiffs were not entitled to summary judgment on the existing record and returned the case for further proceedings.
• In plain terms The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower court's ruling on noncitizens with pending provisional waivers, sending the case back as plaintiffs were not yet entitled to a judgment in their favor.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca4-24-06520 / USCOURTS-ca4-24-06520-0 (opens in a new tab)
• US v. Zerion Franklin (No. 25-04037; filed 2026-08-14) — The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the sentence of Zerion Marcos Franklin, who pled guilty to theft of mail matter and possession of stolen mail. Franklin appealed the application of a two-level firearm enhancement to his sentence. The court remanded for resentencing, finding the district court failed to make factual findings linking Franklin's firearm possession to his offenses.
• In plain terms The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated Zerion Marcos Franklin's sentence for mail theft and possession, sending it back for resentencing because the lower court did not connect his firearm to the crimes.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca4-25-04037 / USCOURTS-ca4-25-04037-0 (opens in a new tab)
• Donald Herrington v. Joseph Walters (No. 25-06083; filed 2026-08-14) — The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Donald Herrington's appeal from a district court order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. Herrington sought additional earned sentence credit for time spent in jail before his incarceration in a correctional facility pursuant to a final conviction order. The court denied a certificate of appealability, concluding Herrington did not demonstrate a substantial denial of a constitutional right.
• In plain terms The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Donald Herrington's appeal about additional sentence credit, finding he did not show a major violation of his constitutional rights.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca4-25-06083 / USCOURTS-ca4-25-06083-0 (opens in a new tab)
• US v. Terrance Moore (No. 25-06306; filed 2026-08-14) — The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court's order denying Terrance Lamont Moore's motions for reconsideration and compassionate release. The court determined that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying either motion. The court also denied Moore's motions for assignment of counsel and for reassignment of his case on remand.
• In plain terms The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court's denial of Terrance Lamont Moore's requests for reconsideration and compassionate release, finding the court acted properly.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca4-25-06306 / USCOURTS-ca4-25-06306-0 (opens in a new tab)

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

• Andrew Brown v. Ron Broomfield (No. 21-99001; filed 2026-08-14) — The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Andrew Lamont Brown's petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Brown had challenged his California conviction and death sentence for first-degree murder, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, incompetence to stand trial, and intellectual disability. The panel also declined to expand the certificate of appealability to include three uncertified claims.
• In plain terms The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of Andrew Brown's request for release from custody, rejecting his challenges to his California conviction and death sentence, and did not expand his appeal.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca9-21-99001 / USCOURTS-ca9-21-99001-0 (opens in a new tab)
• QUEERDOC, PLLC V. DOJ - UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (No. 25-7384; filed 2026-08-14) — The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed a district court order that had quashed an administrative subpoena issued by the Department of Justice (DOJ) to QueerDoc. The subpoena, issued under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), sought documents for an investigation of potential violations of federal health care laws. The panel found no improper purpose and remanded the case for the district court to consider other arguments regarding the subpoena's scope.
• In plain terms The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a district court order that canceled a Department of Justice subpoena for QueerDoc's health care investigation documents, sending the case back for review.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca9-25-7384 / USCOURTS-ca9-25-7384-0 (opens in a new tab)

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

• Sandra Hunter, et al v. Elanco Animal Health Incorporated, et al (No. 23-03061; filed 2026-08-14) — The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of a proposed securities class action lawsuit against Elanco Animal Health Inc. and its officers and directors. The plaintiffs alleged that Elanco deceived the securities market by misrepresenting product demand, attributing revenues to underlying growth rather than "channel stuffing." The court concluded that the plaintiffs did not meet the heightened pleading standards of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act or Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b).
• In plain terms The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of a proposed class action lawsuit against Elanco Animal Health Inc., ruling that plaintiffs did not meet heightened legal standards for their claims.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca7-23-03061 / USCOURTS-ca7-23-03061-0 (opens in a new tab)
• Lynnette Kaiser, et al v. Alcoa USA Corp., et al (No. 25-01627; filed 2026-08-14) — The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the class certification order but reversed the summary judgment order in the case of Lynnette J. Kaiser, et al. v. Alcoa USA Corp., et al. The Court determined that the district court improperly relied on judicial estoppel to find Alcoa liable for breaching agreements regarding retiree healthcare benefits.
• In plain terms The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed class status but reversed the summary judgment against Alcoa USA Corp., finding the district court improperly used judicial estoppel regarding retiree healthcare benefits.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca7-25-01627 / USCOURTS-ca7-25-01627-0 (opens in a new tab)
• Irma Herrera v. USA (No. 25-02428; filed 2026-08-14) — The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of Irma Herrera's medical malpractice suit against the United States. The Court declined to overturn its prior precedent which held that the Westfall Act's saving provision does not apply to cases removed under 42 U.S.C. § 233(c), and Herrera had not exhausted administrative remedies.
• In plain terms The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of Irma Herrera's medical malpractice suit, maintaining its rule that a specific law's saving provision does not apply when administrative steps were not completed.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca7-25-02428 / USCOURTS-ca7-25-02428-0 (opens in a new tab)

United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

• SW Nashville EB Owner, LLC v. Metro Government of Nashville, et al (No. 25-05781; filed 2026-08-14) — The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a district court's dismissal of a lawsuit filed by SW Nashville EB Owner, LLC against the Metropolitan Government of Nashville. SW Nashville alleged that Metro's indefinite hold on its building permit application constituted an unconstitutional taking and violated due process. The appellate court concluded that SW Nashville's claims were ripe for judicial resolution and remanded the case for further proceedings.
• In plain terms The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal of SW Nashville's lawsuit against Nashville's government, finding its claims about a building permit hold ready for court and sent the case back.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca6-25-05781 / USCOURTS-ca6-25-05781-0 (opens in a new tab)

United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

• AECOM Technical Services v. Flatiron | AECOM (No. 25-01140; filed 2026-08-14) — The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court's judgment in a contract dispute between a joint venture, Flatiron | AECOM, and its engineering subcontractor, AECOM Technical Services, Inc. The joint venture appealed rulings made during five years of litigation following a jury verdict for the subcontractor on claims and counterclaims related to a freeway construction project. The appellate court concluded that the joint venture's arguments, including those concerning the dismissal of certain counterclaims and the application of a liability limit, lacked merit.
• In plain terms The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court's decision in a five-year contract dispute, rejecting Flatiron | AECOM's appeal against its subcontractor AECOM Technical Services for a freeway project.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca10-25-01140 / USCOURTS-ca10-25-01140-0 (opens in a new tab)
• United States v. Garley (No. 25-02060; filed 2026-08-14) — The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the federal sentence of Nathen Richard Garley for possessing fentanyl with intent to distribute. Garley was sentenced to 240 months in prison, an upward variance, to be served consecutively to an anticipated state sentence for a murder conviction. The court rejected Garley's arguments that the district court erred by not applying U.S.S.G. § 5G1.3(c) for concurrent sentences and that his sentence was substantively unreasonable due to an inadequate explanation for the upward variance.
• In plain terms The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Nathen Richard Garley's 240-month federal prison sentence for fentanyl distribution, which must run after a state murder sentence, rejecting his appeal arguments.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca10-25-02060 / USCOURTS-ca10-25-02060-0 (opens in a new tab)
• Ntwari v. Bondi (No. 25-09571; filed 2026-08-14) — The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals denied Brunel Igor Ntwari's petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) decision. The BIA had affirmed an immigration judge's (IJ) denial of Ntwari's claims for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The court found Ntwari did not demonstrate legal error in the BIA's decision and failed to show the evidence was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could have reached the same conclusion.
• In plain terms The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals denied Brunel Igor Ntwari's appeal, finding no legal error in the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision to deny his asylum, withholding of removal, and torture protection claims.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca10-25-09571 / USCOURTS-ca10-25-09571-0 (opens in a new tab)
• Medina v. Hansen, et al (No. 26-01172; filed 2026-08-14) — The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals denied Delano Medina's request for a certificate of appealability regarding the district court's denial of his second Rule 59(e) motion. Medina, a state prisoner, had filed a habeas petition and multiple post-judgment motions, with the district court denying his second Rule 59(e) motion as untimely. The appellate court determined that Medina did not show reasonable jurists would debate the district court's procedural ruling on timeliness.
• In plain terms The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals denied Delano Medina's appeal request, finding no reason to question the district court's ruling that his second post-judgment motion was filed too late.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca10-26-01172 / USCOURTS-ca10-26-01172-0 (opens in a new tab)
• Perez Carmona v. Baltazar, et al (No. 26-01307; filed 2026-08-14) — The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals granted an unopposed motion to voluntarily dismiss an appeal in the case of Emilio Enrique Perez Carmona v. Juan Baltazar, et al. The appellants, including the Warden of the Aurora ICE Processing Center, had filed the motion. The court dismissed the appeal as requested.
• In plain terms The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed an appeal in the case of Perez Carmona v. Baltazar, as the appellants, including the Warden, had asked to withdraw it.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca10-26-01307 / USCOURTS-ca10-26-01307-0 (opens in a new tab)

United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

• William Webb, Jr. v. Kirk Neal, et al (No. 24-01439; filed 2026-07-15) — The Third Circuit Court of Appeals vacated and remanded a district court's judgment regarding William Webb, Jr.'s motion to reinstate his civil rights action. Webb, a Delaware prisoner, sought to reinstate his case following a settlement agreement due to alleged falsified evidence, lack of medication, and a breach of confidentiality. The appellate court directed the district court to consider the relationship between the Prison Litigation Reform Act and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), along with the effect of the settlement agreement's jurisdiction clause.
• In plain terms The Third Circuit Court of Appeals sent William Webb, Jr.'s civil rights case back to the lower court to reconsider his request to reopen it after a settlement, regarding certain legal rules and agreement terms.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca3-24-01439 / USCOURTS-ca3-24-01439-0 (opens in a new tab)
• William Webb, Jr. v. Kirk Neal, et al (No. 24-01439; filed 2026-08-14) — The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied the appellant's petition for rehearing en banc in the case of William Webb, Jr. v. Kirk Neal, et al. The Court also issued an order vacating its previous opinion from July 15, 2026, and filing an amended opinion contemporaneously to correct minor typographical errors, stating that these changes do not affect the judgment.
• In plain terms The Third Circuit Court of Appeals denied a new hearing request in William Webb, Jr.'s case and updated its July 15, 2026, opinion to fix minor errors, without changing the judgment.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca3-24-01439 / USCOURTS-ca3-24-01439-1 (opens in a new tab)
• William Webb, Jr. v. Kirk Neal, et al (No. 24-01439; filed 2026-08-14) — The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit vacated the District Court's judgment denying William Webb, Jr.'s motion to reinstate his civil rights case. The Court found the District Court erred in concluding it lacked jurisdiction under the Prison Litigation Reform Act and remanded for further consideration of the Act's provisions and the settlement agreement's terms.
• In plain terms The Third Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower court's denial of William Webb, Jr.'s request to reopen his civil rights case, sending it back to consider the Prison Litigation Reform Act and settlement terms.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca3-24-01439 / USCOURTS-ca3-24-01439-2 (opens in a new tab)
• Dwight Davis v. Secretary US Department of Homeland Security, et al (No. 25-01131; filed 2026-08-14) — The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed a district court's judgment regarding Dwight Davis's claim for derivative citizenship. The Court concluded that Davis did not establish that his parents legally separated before his eighteenth birthday, a requirement under the applicable statute for derivative citizenship.
• In plain terms The Third Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court's decision denying Dwight Davis derivative citizenship, finding he did not prove his parents legally separated before he turned 18.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca3-25-01131 / USCOURTS-ca3-25-01131-0 (opens in a new tab)
• Jose Aristy-Rosa v. Attorney General United States of America (No. 25-01490; filed 2026-08-14) — The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit vacated the stay of removal for Jose Arcenio Aristy-Rosa, who had challenged a final order of removal. The Court determined that Aristy-Rosa did not meet his burden of demonstrating the required factors for a removal stay, including a sufficient likelihood of success on the merits or risk of irreparable harm.
• In plain terms The Third Circuit Court of Appeals canceled Jose Arcenio Aristy-Rosa's temporary halt of removal, ruling he did not show enough reason to delay his deportation.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-01 — appellate court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-14)
• Source: USCOURTS-ca3-25-01490 / USCOURTS-ca3-25-01490-0 (opens in a new tab)

United States Court of International Trade

• Salvi Chemical Industries Ltd. v. United States (No. 1:26-cv-02569; filed 2026-08-13) — The United States Court of International Trade denied Chattem Chemicals, Inc.'s motion to intervene as a defendant-intervenor in a case involving an antidumping duty order on glycine. The court determined that Chattem was not a "party to the proceeding" in the underlying changed circumstances review conducted by the Department of Commerce, which precluded intervention as a matter of right. Permissive intervention was also unavailable for this action under 28 U.S.C. § 2631(j)(1)(B).
• In plain terms The Court of International Trade denied Chattem Chemicals' request to join a case about an antidumping duty order, finding it was not an original party to the review and thus could not intervene.
• Included because: USCOURTS-SEL-02 — national court opinion (all listed) (document dated 2026-08-13)
• Source: USCOURTS-cit-1_26-cv-02569 / USCOURTS-cit-1_26-cv-02569-0 (opens in a new tab)

5.2 Counts by Court Category

Archive-window disclosure (rule USCOURTS-FETCH-01): 29644 USCOURTS package(s) have been listed in delta syncs but fell outside the 7-day archive window and were not fetched (global running count across all syncs, not limited to this date).

Official press releases and statements the agencies themselves date on 2026-08-15 (sources listed in the source guide). These are the agencies' own announcements — official advocacy, quoted and attributed, not findings of this digest. Agency web content can be edited or removed without notice; captures and hashes are preserved per the provenance policy.

NASA News Releases

• APOD: 2026 August 15 – Bright Perseids from Sweden (opens in a new tab) — dated 2026-08-15 by the agency
• Included because: AGENCYPR-SEL-01 — official agency release dated this day by the agency (all such releases from active sources are listed; titles only in the pilot)
• Source: agency newsroom (above) · independent archive (opens in a new tab)

U.S. Attorneys News (email)

• August term of the Federal Grand Jury returns indictments for firearms and immigration charges (opens in a new tab) — dated 2026-08-15 by the agency
• Included because: AGENCYPR-SEL-01 — official agency release dated this day by the agency (all such releases from active sources are listed; titles only in the pilot)
• Source: agency email bulletin to this project's subscription, captured and DKIM-verified
• Escapee Sentenced to Additional Prison Time (opens in a new tab) — dated 2026-08-15 by the agency
• Included because: AGENCYPR-SEL-01 — official agency release dated this day by the agency (all such releases from active sources are listed; titles only in the pilot)
• Source: agency email bulletin to this project's subscription, captured and DKIM-verified
• Honduran National Indicted For Being Illegal Alien in Possession of a Firearm (opens in a new tab) — dated 2026-08-15 by the agency
• Included because: AGENCYPR-SEL-01 — official agency release dated this day by the agency (all such releases from active sources are listed; titles only in the pilot)
• Source: agency email bulletin to this project's subscription, captured and DKIM-verified
• Madison Man Sentenced to More Than 5 Years for Illegally Possessing Firearm While On Supervision for Armed Robbery (opens in a new tab) — dated 2026-08-15 by the agency
• Included because: AGENCYPR-SEL-01 — official agency release dated this day by the agency (all such releases from active sources are listed; titles only in the pilot)
• Source: agency email bulletin to this project's subscription, captured and DKIM-verified
• New Orleans Felon Sentenced For Distributing Pure Methamphetamine (opens in a new tab) — dated 2026-08-15 by the agency
• Included because: AGENCYPR-SEL-01 — official agency release dated this day by the agency (all such releases from active sources are listed; titles only in the pilot)
• Source: agency email bulletin to this project's subscription, captured and DKIM-verified

VA News Releases

• Veterans stay connected to care following Mississippi tornadoes (opens in a new tab) — dated 2026-08-15 by the agency
• Included because: AGENCYPR-SEL-01 — official agency release dated this day by the agency (all such releases from active sources are listed; titles only in the pilot)
• Source: agency newsroom (above) · independent archive (opens in a new tab)

Also observed this day, not listed above: 1 release(s) the agencies date on other days (feed backfill from newly activated sources). Excluded under AGENCYPR-EX-01; counted in the Coverage Statement; captures preserved.

Roll-call votes the chambers themselves record on 2026-08-15, in vote-number order. Every recorded vote in the window is listed: selection is by existence, not by importance, and no rule here prefers one question over another. Tallies and member positions come from the chamber's own published vote record, captured and hashed like every other source. This is the chambers' vote record itself; section 1.3 lists the Congressional Record granules in which votes were printed.

No recorded votes dated this day were observed.

What the chambers did with individual measures on 2026-08-15, as the Library of Congress's own bill-status record states it. Every action in the ingestion window is listed, in bill-designation order: selection is by existence, not by importance, and no rule here prefers one measure over another. Section 2 lists the text of bills published this day; this section lists what happened to them.

Publication lag: the record dates an action by the day the chamber took it and publishes it the following morning, so this section fills in after the day it describes has ended — the same lag the judicial section carries, and it is restated under Known gaps.

No bill actions dated this day were observed.

Source: the Executive Office of the President, as published on whitehouse.gov and observed 2026-08-15. These are the President's own instruments — executive orders, proclamations, memoranda — carried here as the White House published them, days before the Federal Register compiles them into section 3.

Register (GUIDE §2): titles are the publisher's words and appear verbatim; any prose of ours about them is attributed, exactly as it is for agency releases. This section states what the White House published, never whether it was significant.

No presidential actions dated this day were observed. The White House publishes on its own schedule; an action taken today may appear in a later digest, and one dated earlier is counted under PRESACT-EX-01 rather than listed as today's news.

This section is mandatory and appears in every digest, including days with no publications. It accounts for every package observed on this digest day (GUIDE §3, observation-day filing); each package's own date may differ and is stated where it does. "Excluded" always names the mechanical rule; there are no unexplained omissions.

Sync summary: BILLS: completed 2026-08-16T13:18:48Z · CREC: completed 2026-08-16T13:18:47Z · FR: completed 2026-08-16T13:18:49Z · PLAW: completed 2026-08-16T13:18:51Z · USCOURTS: completed 2026-08-16T13:18:50Z; last watermarks as listed in the header.

Exclusion rules applied today:

• USCOURTS-EX-01: district court opinions counted, not individually summarized — 322 item(s)
• USCOURTS-EX-02: bankruptcy court opinions counted, not individually summarized — 11 item(s)
• AGENCYPR-EX-01: release dated outside this day by the agency (feed backfill / newly activated source) — counted, not listed — 1 item(s)

Source graphics: 0 graphic(s) flagged across today's documents: 0 content graphic(s) (equations, forms, maps, annex pages) and 0 boilerplate (signatures/seals, excluded by rule FR-GPH-01). Of the content graphics, 0 were analyzed via vision pass (vision pass not yet implemented) and 0 embedded above; the remainder are viewable in the cited source PDFs.

Known gaps: 1 package(s) were not fetched and are not covered above; courts post opinions with delay; opinions filed on this date may appear in later syncs.

Verification: any item above can be checked against its source in one click via its govinfo link. Totals in this table are reproducible from the stored extraction records for 2026-08-15.

Selection rules, summarization prompts, and thresholds are versioned in this repository and identified by the pipeline version in the header (5ed80d7). Editorial principles — primary sources only, opinion-agnostic prose, mechanical party-blind selection, full coverage accounting — are defined in GUIDE.md §2. Ruleset in effect: prompt version 2; plain-language version 2. To reproduce this digest: re-run the report stage against the extracted records for 2026-08-15; no upstream re-fetch is required (GUIDE.md §5).

Filing note (2026-08-06, standing): digests from 2026-08-06 file govinfo packages under their day of first observation — FAPD's three clocks are explained in the FAQ. The Federal Register files under its cover date, on which it is legally published. Digests before 2026-08-06 filed by each document's own date; the two Congressional Record issues observed 2026-08-04/05 (proceedings of 08-03/08-04) fell between the freeze and this change and appear in no digest — disclosed here, not backfilled.

"In plain terms" lines are model-generated restatements of the stored summaries, derived only from the summary text shown beside them; items without one had no usable restatement. ALL-CAPS source headings are case-normalized for display; original casing is preserved at the source link. Term definitions above are static, repo-versioned prose.

License: this digest's compilation and prose are CC BY 4.0 (opens in a new tab) (credit "FAPD — Free Agentic Publication Digester"); quoted official government text is public domain (17 U.S.C. § 105).