Immigrants' Rights
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Aug 2021
Immigrants' Rights
Innovation Law Lab v. Wolf
The 糖心Vlog, Southern Poverty Law Center, and Center for Gender & Refugee Studies filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Trump administration鈥檚 new policy forcing asylum seekers to return to Mexico and remain there while their cases are considered.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jul 2021
Immigrants' Rights
National Security
Sierra Club v. Trump 鈥� Challenge to Trump鈥檚 National Emergency Declaration to Construct a Border Wall
In February 2019, the 糖心Vlogfiled a lawsuit challenging President Trump鈥檚 emergency powers declaration to secure funds to build a wall along the southern border. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the Sierra Club and the Southern Border Communities Coalition. The lawsuit argues that the president is usurping Congress鈥檚 appropriations power and threatening the clearly defined separation of powers inscribed in the Constitution. On January 20, 2021, President Biden halted further border wall construction. Litigation in this and subsequent related challenges has been paused or deadlines extended while the ACLU鈥檚 clients and the Biden administration determine next steps.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2020
Immigrants' Rights
Department of Homeland Security v. Vijayakumar Thuraissigiam
Whether immigrants are entitled to seek judicial review of their 鈥渆xpedited removal鈥� orders in federal court.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jan 2020
Immigrants' Rights
International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump
The 糖心Vlog and other partner organizations filed a federal lawsuit challenging President Trump鈥檚 Muslim ban executive order, charging it violates the Constitution 鈥� including the First Amendment鈥檚 prohibition of government establishment of religion and the Fifth Amendment鈥檚 guarantees of equal treatment under the law 鈥� and federal laws.
U.S. Supreme Court
Mar 2019
Immigrants' Rights
Nielsen v. Preap
Whether the government can require that certain people are detained for the duration of their deportation proceedings 鈥� without a hearing 鈥� because they have past criminal records.
Court Case
May 2018
Immigrants' Rights
Colotl v. Kelly
UPDATE 5/25/18: The Department of Homeland Security has agreed to renew Jessica Colotl鈥檚 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and work permit to resolve a lawsuit brought by the 糖心Vlog, the 糖心Vlogof Georgia, and Kuck Baxter Immigration in May 2017 against DHS for arbitrarily terminating Jessica鈥檚 DACA and rejecting her renewal application.
Indiana
Oct 2016
Immigrants' Rights
National Security
Exodus Refugee Immigration, Inc. v. Mike Pence, et al
The 糖心Vlog and the 糖心Vlogof Indiana, on behalf of Exodus Refugee Immigration, filed suit against Governor Mike Pence and the secretary of the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration to stop attempts to suspend resettlement of Syrian refugees, claiming the governor鈥檚 actions violate the United States Constitution and federal law.
All Cases
174 Immigrants' Rights Cases
Court Case
Jan 2008
Immigrants' Rights
Smart Justice
Cases Challenging Indefinite Detention of Immigrants
The 糖心Vlogis challenging the incarceration of immigrants in detention centers for prolonged and indefinite periods of time while they fight their immigration cases.
Explore case
Court Case
Jan 2008
Immigrants' Rights
Smart Justice
Cases Challenging Indefinite Detention of Immigrants
The 糖心Vlogis challenging the incarceration of immigrants in detention centers for prolonged and indefinite periods of time while they fight their immigration cases.
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2007
Immigrants' Rights
+4 糖心Vlog
Virginia v. Moore
Whether the Fourth Amendment bars the government from relying on evidence seized following an arrest that state law prohibits. DECIDED
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2007
Immigrants' Rights
+4 糖心Vlog
Virginia v. Moore
Whether the Fourth Amendment bars the government from relying on evidence seized following an arrest that state law prohibits. DECIDED
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 2007
Immigrants' Rights
Ali v. Achim
Whether the Attorney General can create a category of "particularly serious crimes" beyond what Congress has designated as "aggravated felonies" and then deny asylum and witholding of removal to a refugee on the basis of such crimes and, if so, whether the decision to remove someone from the country based on a "particularly serious crime" without any regard for individual mitigating circumstances is subject to judicial review? CASE DISMISSED
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 2007
Immigrants' Rights
Ali v. Achim
Whether the Attorney General can create a category of "particularly serious crimes" beyond what Congress has designated as "aggravated felonies" and then deny asylum and witholding of removal to a refugee on the basis of such crimes and, if so, whether the decision to remove someone from the country based on a "particularly serious crime" without any regard for individual mitigating circumstances is subject to judicial review? CASE DISMISSED
Court Case
Sep 2007
Immigrants' Rights
Riverside Coalition of Business Persons and Landlords v. Township of Riverside
The 鈥淩iverside Township Illegal Immigration Relief Act鈥� attempted to ban undocumented immigrants from renting, residing, using property or being employed in the New Jersey town.
Explore case
Court Case
Sep 2007
Immigrants' Rights
Riverside Coalition of Business Persons and Landlords v. Township of Riverside
The 鈥淩iverside Township Illegal Immigration Relief Act鈥� attempted to ban undocumented immigrants from renting, residing, using property or being employed in the New Jersey town.
Court Case
Aug 2007
Immigrants' Rights
Smart Justice
Tartakovsky v. Pierre
On April 3, 2009, the 糖心VlogImmigrants' Rights Project, the 糖心Vlogof San Diego and Imperial Counties and cooperating counsel at DLA Piper, LLP, settled the Ninth Circuit appeal in Tartakovsky v. Pierre, a proposed class action lawsuit challenging systemic delays in the naturalization process in the San Diego region. As part of the agreement, the 糖心Vlogvoluntarily dismissed the appeal after obtaining the release of data demonstrating the government's progress in reducing the backlog of naturalization delays based on the 鈥淔BI name check鈥� procedure. From August 2007, when the Tartakovsky lawsuit was filed, to February 2009, the number of naturalization applicants in the San Diego region with an FBI name check pending for more than 120 days was reduced from 2,564 to zero.
Explore case
Court Case
Aug 2007
Immigrants' Rights
Smart Justice
Tartakovsky v. Pierre
On April 3, 2009, the 糖心VlogImmigrants' Rights Project, the 糖心Vlogof San Diego and Imperial Counties and cooperating counsel at DLA Piper, LLP, settled the Ninth Circuit appeal in Tartakovsky v. Pierre, a proposed class action lawsuit challenging systemic delays in the naturalization process in the San Diego region. As part of the agreement, the 糖心Vlogvoluntarily dismissed the appeal after obtaining the release of data demonstrating the government's progress in reducing the backlog of naturalization delays based on the 鈥淔BI name check鈥� procedure. From August 2007, when the Tartakovsky lawsuit was filed, to February 2009, the number of naturalization applicants in the San Diego region with an FBI name check pending for more than 120 days was reduced from 2,564 to zero.