Chart of Pending and Recent Detainer Litigation 2014
Download original document:
This text is machine-read, and may contain errors. Check the original document to verify accuracy.
Case Brizuela v. Feliciano Roy v. Los Angeles County Procedural vehicle Federal / Constitutional claims A Connecticut resident, represented by students in Yale Law School’s immigration clinic, filed P: Yale Law School a representative habeas Worker and No. 12petition and class action Immigrant Rights 0226 (D. complaint challenging Advocacy Clinic Conn. filed the Connecticut (Michael Wishnie) Feb. 13, Department of 2012) Corrections’ practice of D: Local law holding individuals after enforcement their lawful state custody has expired solely on the basis of an immigration detainer Petition for writ of habeas corpus; in the alternative for relief under 42 U.S.C. 1983; seeking class certiciation for representative habeas action, or class action under 1983. 1. Fourth Amendment violation. 2. Fourth Amendment violation (ultra vires) 3. Fourth Amendment violation (detention w/o hearing) 4. Fourth Amendment violation (state comandeering) 5. Fourteenth Amendment (substantive due process) 6. Fourteenth Amendment (procedural due process) Roy v. Los Angeles County is a lawsuit No. CV 12against Los Angeles 9012 P: ACLU County and the L.A. (Central County Sheriff Lee Baca District D: County of Los for denying bail on the California, Angeles; Sheriff of basis of ICE holds, and filed Los Angeles for holding people in October 19, County Jail for more 2012) than 48 hours based on those ICE holds. 3. Violation of California Constituion, Article 1 Section 7 (due process) 4. Violation of 1. Fourteenth Amendment California 42 USC 1983; seeking (42 USC 1983) (due process) Constitution, Article class certification 2. Fourth Amendment 1 Section 13 pursuant to FRCP (unlawful seizure) (unlawful seizure) 23(b)(2) 3. 5. False imprisonment 6. California Government code 815.2 and 815.6 (mandatory LASD duty to allow persons to post bail) Cite Parties Facts State law claims Relief sought None. 1. Writ of habeas corpus 2. Issue injunction 3. Declaratory judgment 4. Reasonable costs 5. Any other relief court deems proper 1. Declaratory judgment that refusal to allow posting bail is unlawful 2. Injunction not to detain pursuant to immigration hold 3. Injunction not to detain beyond 48 hours without probable cause hearing 4. Declaratory judgment that detention per immigration hold is unlawful Status Complaint URL Settled http://www.le galactioncente r.org/sites/def ault/files/docs /lac/Brizuela% 20v.%20Felicia no%20Complai nt.pdf Filed 10/19/12 https://www.s cribd.com/doc /110550860/R oy-v-L-ACountyComplaint All Plaintiffs voluntarily reported to the Williamson County 1. Fourth Amendment (42 Criminal Justice Center Decision USC 1983) (illegal policy, (“CJC”) after each 5. Violation of 9/10/2012, granting No. 3:11practice, and custom) receiving a Tennesse defendant's motion cv-01168 2. Fourteenth Amendment P: Elliott Ozment misdemeanor citation in Constitution, Article 1. Declaratory relief to dismiss: ICE (Middle (procedural due process) Available on Rios-Quiroz v. Law lieu of custodial arrest. 42 USC 1983; class 1, Section 15 (denial 2. Damages detainer is District 3. Fourth Amendment (TCA PACER; to be Williamson When Plaintiffs arrived certification pursuant of bail to persons 3. Class certification mandatory and Tennessee, 40-7-123 unconstitutional as County D: Williamson at the Williamson to FRCP 23 (b)(3) charged with non4-5. Reasonable therefore complaint filed on X drive filed applied) County Tennessee County Sheriff’s Office capital offenses) expenses / costs is properly 12/12/2011 4. Violation of Supremacy (“WCSO”), employees 6. False addressed to ) Clause (preempted local of the WCSO Imprisonment federal enforcement of federal communicated with the government. immigration law) United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement On March 18, 2011, the district court denied defendants’ motion P: Mexican to dismiss for 1. Assume American Legal An individual filed suit failure to state a http://www.le jurisdiction. No. 10Defense and against the LaGrange claim, finding that galactioncente 2. Declaratory r.org/sites/def 0197 (N.D. Educational Fund County Sheriff and jail 1. Fifth and Fourteenth plaintiff had Rivas v. judgment. Ind. filed administrators for 42 USC 1983 Amendment (due process) None. sufficiently stated a ault/files/docs Martin 3. Compensatory June 16, D: Sheriff of holding her on an ICE (42 USC 1983) claim for violation /lac/Melendre damages 2010) LaGrange County; detainer for ten days of her due process z-6-6-104. Reasonable fees various jail after she posted bond. rights. On Complaint.pdf 5. Other relief. commanders September 1, 2011, the parties stipulated to dismissal with prejudice of all District court granted defendants’ motions for No. 09A U.S. citizen sued summary judgment, 3417 individual ICE officers finding that (W.D. Mo. and a Department of 1. Actual and plaintiff’s Fourth http://www.le P: Sharma1. Fourth Amendment filed Nov. State official alleging compensatory Amendment claim galactioncente Crawford, (unreasonable search and r.org/sites/def 6, 2009) that they violated his damages failed because Keil v. Attorneys at Law, seizure) appeal Fourth and Fifth Habeas corpus None. 2. Punitive and defendants had ault/files/docs Triveline LLC 2. Fifth Amendment (due docketed, Amendment rights by exemplarary damages probable cause to /lac/Keil-11-9process) No. 11unlawfully arresting and 3-4. Attorney fees / arrest plaintiff for 09D: ICE agents 3. Federal Tort Claims Act 1647 (8th holding him in a county other relief falsely claiming Complaint.pdf Cir., Mar. jail pursuant to an ICE U.S. citizenship 24, 2011) detainer. and misusing a U.S. passport. The Eighth Circuit affirmed the lower JimenezMoreno v. Napolitano Galarza v. Szalczyk Two individuals filed a 1. Violation of 5 U.S.C. §§ Writ of habeas No. 11P: National class action lawsuit 706 (Administrative corpus; injunctive 05452 Immigrant Justice challenging ICE’s Procedure Act) relief pursuant to 5 (N.D. Center (Mark assertion of authority to 2. Violation of Fourth U.S.C. 702. Seeking Ill. filed Au Fleming) instruct law enforcement Amendment class cert via FRCP g. 11, agencies to detain 3. Violation of Fifth 23(b)(1) and (2) or 2011) D: ICE alleged noncitizens for Amendment (c)(4) the sole purpose of 4. Violation of Tenth In November 2008, Mr. Galarza was mistakenly 1. Fourth Amendment and swept up in a series of due process (Bivens) drug arrests by 2. Fifth Amendment Allentown police. Mr. (Bivens) (equal protection) Galarza, who had 3. Fifth Amendment and 8 nothing to do with the CFR 1357 (due process) 2012 WL P: ACLU of crimes, was jailed at the 4. Fourteenth Amendment 1080020 Pennsylvania & Lehigh County Prison (42 USC 1983) (equal (E.D. Pa. ACLU IRP along with other protection) Mar. 30, arrestees. He was later 42 USC 1983 5. Fourth and Fourteenth 2012) D: ICE; local law acquitted of any Amendment (42 USC 1983) (unpublish enforcement; local wrongdoing. Though he (unreasonable seizure, ed) government posted bail the next day, deprivation of liberty and Mr. Galarza was not due process) released because ICE 6. Fourteenth Amendment had issued an (42 USC 1983) (due process) immigration detainer 7. Fourteenth Amendment against him. Mr. (42 USC 1983) (equal Galarza’s Social protection) Security card and None. None. 1-3. Certification as class action 4-7. Declaratory judgment 8. Injunction 9-10 Costs/fees and other relief http://www.le galactioncente r.org/sites/def Appears to be still ault/files/docs pending /lac/MorenoComplaint-811-11.pdf 1. Compensatory On March 19, damages as to City of 2013, Plaintiff Allentown and appealed the March individual defendants 30, 2012 order and 2. Punitive damages opinion of the as to individual court granting defendants Lehigh County’s 3-4. Reasonable costs Motion to Dismiss. / other relief http://www.ac lu.org/files/ass ets/2011.04.06 _first_amende d_complaint.p df The ACLU-NC filed a lawsuit in September 2008 charging that the Committee for 2010 WL P: ACLU of Sonoma County Immigrant 841372 Northern CA Sheriff's Department Rights of (N.D. Ca. (Andre Segura) and the U.S. Bureau of Sonoma Mar. 10, Immigration and County v. 2010) D: ICE; local law Customs Enforcement Sonoma (unpublish enforcement; local (ICE) have been County ed) govt collaborating beyond the law to target, arrest, and detain Latino residents of Sonoma County. Florida Immigrant Coalition v. Mendez 2010 WL 4384220 (S.D.Fl. Oct. 28, 2010) (unpublish ed) P: LatinoJustice PRLDEF D: local govt Three Florida immigrant rights organizations and an individual plaintiff filed a habeas petition and complaint seeking to enjoin the policies and practices of the defendant, Palm Beach County Sheriff, that result in confinement of Appellant was arrested for a third degree felony, and a bond of $1,000 P: Palm Beach PDs was promptly set. Ricketts v. 985 So.2d However, when he Palm Beach 591 (2008) D: local govt attempted to post the County Sheriff bond, the sheriff refused to accept it, because appellant was subject to an immigration hold. 1. Fourth Amendment (42 USC 1983) (unreasonable search and seizure) 2. Fourteenth Amendment (42 USC 1983) (equal protection) 3. Fourteenth Amendment (42 USC 1983) (due process) 4. Fourth Amendment and 8 USC 1357 (Bivens and 5 USC 702) (unreasonable search and seizure) 42 USC 1983, 5 USC 5. Fifth Amendment (Bivens 702 and 5 USC 702) (equal protection) 6. Fifth Amendment, 8 USC 1357, 8 CFR 287.3, 8 CFR 287.7 (Bivens and 5 USC 702) (due process) 7. Violation of 42 USC 2000d et seq. 8. 5 USC 706 9. 42 USC 1983, 42 USC 1985(3) 18. False Imprisonment 10. California Constution, Art. I., Section 13 11. California 1. Preliminary and Constitution, Art. I, permanent injunction Section 7(a) (equal against County protection) Defendants 12. California 2. Preliminary and Constitution, Art. I, permanent Section 7(a) (due injunctions against process) 287.7 claims ICE and individual 13. Violation of Bane rejected. defendants Act, California Civil Otherwise, settled 3-5 Declaratory Code 52.1 for money damages judgment 14. California and policy changes 6. Nominal, Government Code § compensatory, 11135 and Its special, statutory, and Implementing punitive damages Regulations 7 -9. 15. False Costs/expenses/other Imprisonment (Cal relief Gov’t Code § 815.2) 16. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress 1. Issue writ of habeas corpus 2. Declatory 1. Fourteenth Amendment judgment Dismissed 42 USC 1983, habeas (42 USC 1983) (due process) 3. Injunction None. (governmental corpus 2. Fourth Amendment and 4. Nominal, immunity) Fourteenth Amendment compensatory, and punitive damages 5-6. Costs / other relief. Habeas corpus Habeas; Fourth amendment None. http://www.le galactioncente r.org/sites/def ault/files/docs /lac/P-2ndAmend-Comp9-14-09.pdf http://www.le galactioncente r.org/sites/def ault/files/docs /lac/9-03-09Complaint.pdf Dismissed (court held that Writ of habeas corpus immigration Not available detainer habeas is a federal issue) No. 090091 (M.D. Cote v. Lubins Fla. filed F eb. 23, 2009) No. 111582 (S.D. Jimenez v. Ind. filed N United States ov. 30, 2011) Urbina v. Rustin No. 080979 (W.D. Pa. filed Ju ly 11, 2008) 2011 WL Renteria4048523 Villegas v. (M.D. Metropolitan Tenn. Sept. Government 12, 2011) of Nashville (unpublish ed) Cote, a twenty-threeyear-old mother of three, was arrested without charge. The P: ACLU of Florida police ignored a domestic violence call to Habeas corpus D: local govt which they were responding, and arrested Cote instead who couldn’t prove her citizenship, usurping federal immigration A U.S. Citizen who was unlawfully held for three P: ACLU of IN days pursuant to an ICE Bivens. Federal Tort detainer and denied Claims Act. D: ICE bond filed suit against unknown individual ICE officers and the United P: Community Justice Project (Pittsburgh, PA) D: Local government P: National Lawyers Guild National Immigration Project, SPLC (Tom Fritzsche) D: ICE, local government 1. No administrative remedies available 2. Arrest in violation of Fourth Amendment 3. Deprivation of liberty without due process in violation of Fourteenth Amendment 4. Form I-247 does not provide lawful basis to detain 1. Unreasonable seizure in violation of Fourth Amendment (Bivens) 2. Erroneous detention and injury represent negligence, false imprisonment; U.S. is liable under F.T.C.A. Two individuals filed a habeas petition and class action suit against the Warden of Allegheny Habeas corpus, 42 County Jail challenging USC 1983. Seeking their continued class certification detention pursuant to pursuant to FRCP ICE detainers and 23(b)(2) and (3) alleging violations of the Fourteenth Amendment 1. Violation of Due Process Clause of Fourteenth Amendment The lawsuit argued that the Tennessee Supreme Court previously ruled that the Nashville Police Department was solely responsible for all prevention and detection of crimes, investigation and apprehension of criminals, and enforcement of criminal and civil laws. 2. Violation of Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. §§ 701 et seq.; 28 U.S.C. § 2201) 3. Violation of Fourteenth Amendment Due Process clause 5 USC 702 None. Writ of habeas corpus http://www.ac Dismissed as moot lufl.org/pdfs/c (P released) otehabeas.pdf None. 1. Accept jurisdiction 2. Compensatory damages 3. Award all other relief None. “Plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification on July 23, 2008, 1. Assume seeking to certify a jurisdiction class consisting of 2. Order to show all who are or will cause why writ be detained in the should not be granted Allegheny County 3. Grant writ Jail based solely on 4. Grant other relief an immigration detainer and without the opportunity to http://www.le galactioncente r.org/sites/def ault/files/docs /lac/Complaint ,%2011-3011.pdf 1. Violation of Metropolitan Charter (Tenn. Code. §§ 2914-102, 103, 111; 28 U.S.C. § 2201) 4. False imprisonment Currently in discovery http://www.le galactioncente r.org/sites/def ault/files/docs /lac/Urbina%2 0v.%20Rustin% 20Habeas%20 Petition%20an d%20Compl.pd f 1. Declaratory http://cdna.spl judgment Claim that local center.org/site 2. Preliminary and cooperation with s/default/files/ then permanent ICE violated city downloads/cas injunction charter was e/Renteria3. Compensatory and allowed to go Villegas_Third_ permanent damages forward Amended_Co 4-5. Reasonable costs mplaint.pdf / other relief