Immigrants' Rights
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Aug 2021

Immigrants' Rights
Innovation Law Lab v. Wolf
The 勛圖眻畦, Southern Poverty Law Center, and Center for Gender & Refugee Studies filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Trump administrations 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 Challenge to Trumps National Emergency Declaration to Construct a Border Wall
In February 2019, the 勛圖眻畦 filed a lawsuit challenging President Trumps 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 Congresss 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 勛圖眻畦s 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 expedited removal orders in federal court.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jan 2020

Immigrants' Rights
International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump
The 勛圖眻畦 and other partner organizations filed a federal lawsuit challenging President Trumps Muslim ban executive order, charging it violates the Constitution including the First Amendments prohibition of government establishment of religion and the Fifth Amendments guarantees of equal treatment under the law 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 without a hearing 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 Colotls Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and work permit to resolve a lawsuit brought by the 勛圖眻畦, the 勛圖眻畦 of Georgia, and Kuck Baxter Immigration in May 2017 against DHS for arbitrarily terminating Jessicas DACA and rejecting her renewal application.
Indiana
Oct 2016

Immigrants' Rights
National Security
Exodus Refugee Immigration, Inc. v. Mike Pence, et al
The 勛圖眻畦 and the 勛圖眻畦 of 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 governors actions violate the United States Constitution and federal law.
All Cases
172 Immigrants' Rights Cases

Court Case
Jul 2015
Immigrants' Rights
Escobar v. Gaines
On the night of October 20, 2010, Angel Escobar and Jorge Sarmiento were in their beds in their small, two-bedroom apartment in the Clairmont complex in Nashville. Several roommates and friends were in other rooms. The doors and windows were all shut and locked. Suddenly there was a loud banging at the door and voices shouting "Police!" and "Policia!" When no one answered, the agents tried to force the door open. Scared, occupants hid. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents began hitting objects against the bedroom windows, trying to break in. Without a search warrant and without consent, the ICE agents eventually knocked in the front door and shattered a window, shouting racial slurs and storming into the bedrooms, holding guns to some people's heads.
Explore case
Court Case
Jul 2015

Immigrants' Rights
Escobar v. Gaines
On the night of October 20, 2010, Angel Escobar and Jorge Sarmiento were in their beds in their small, two-bedroom apartment in the Clairmont complex in Nashville. Several roommates and friends were in other rooms. The doors and windows were all shut and locked. Suddenly there was a loud banging at the door and voices shouting "Police!" and "Policia!" When no one answered, the agents tried to force the door open. Scared, occupants hid. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents began hitting objects against the bedroom windows, trying to break in. Without a search warrant and without consent, the ICE agents eventually knocked in the front door and shattered a window, shouting racial slurs and storming into the bedrooms, holding guns to some people's heads.

Arizona
Jun 2015
Immigrants' Rights
Lopez-Valenzuela, et al. v. Maricopa County, et al.
After a long legal battle the 勛圖眻畦, on behalf of plaintiffs in Lopez Valenzuela v. Maricopa County prevailed by blocking further implementation of a law that for years did not allow judges to even consider bail for criminal defendants who were suspected of having "entered or remained in the United States illegally," and which applied to most state felony charges in Arizona, including relatively minor crimes such as shoplifting and possessing a phony ID. As a result of Proposition 100, which amended the state constitution, state courts were required to jail countless individuals who posed no risk of flight or danger to others.
Explore case
Arizona
Jun 2015

Immigrants' Rights
Lopez-Valenzuela, et al. v. Maricopa County, et al.
After a long legal battle the 勛圖眻畦, on behalf of plaintiffs in Lopez Valenzuela v. Maricopa County prevailed by blocking further implementation of a law that for years did not allow judges to even consider bail for criminal defendants who were suspected of having "entered or remained in the United States illegally," and which applied to most state felony charges in Arizona, including relatively minor crimes such as shoplifting and possessing a phony ID. As a result of Proposition 100, which amended the state constitution, state courts were required to jail countless individuals who posed no risk of flight or danger to others.

Georgia
Mar 2015
Immigrants' Rights
Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights, et al. v. Deal
On June 2, 2011, the 勛圖眻畦 Immigrants Rights Project joined with the 勛圖眻畦 Racial Justice Project, the 勛圖眻畦 of Georgia, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), Asian Law Caucus, the National Immigration Law Center (NILC), and private co-counsel to file a lawsuit challenging Georgia's anti-immigrant law, HB 87, which was inspired by Arizona's notorious SB 1070. The Georgia law authorized police to demand "papers" demonstrating citizenship or immigration status during traffic stops, criminalized Georgians in their daily interaction with immigrants, and made it nearly impossible for individuals without specific identification documents to access state facilities and services.
Explore case
Georgia
Mar 2015

Immigrants' Rights
Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights, et al. v. Deal
On June 2, 2011, the 勛圖眻畦 Immigrants Rights Project joined with the 勛圖眻畦 Racial Justice Project, the 勛圖眻畦 of Georgia, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), Asian Law Caucus, the National Immigration Law Center (NILC), and private co-counsel to file a lawsuit challenging Georgia's anti-immigrant law, HB 87, which was inspired by Arizona's notorious SB 1070. The Georgia law authorized police to demand "papers" demonstrating citizenship or immigration status during traffic stops, criminalized Georgians in their daily interaction with immigrants, and made it nearly impossible for individuals without specific identification documents to access state facilities and services.

Alabama
Mar 2015
Immigrants' Rights
Smart Justice
Hispanic Interest Coalition of Alabama v. Bentley
The Alabama state legislature passed a draconian anti-immigrant law in June, 2011, the toughest of several state laws modeled after Arizonas SB 1070. Like the Arizona law, SB 56 authorized police to ask for proof of citizenship or immigration status during a traffic stop based on reasonable suspicion that the person was an undocumented immigrant. The law went even further than Arizonas, with provisions that required public school officials to verify the immigration status of children and their parents, that made it a crime for undocumented immigrants to solicit work, and criminalized Alabamians for ordinary, everyday interactions with undocumented individuals like renting a mobile home or offering a ride.
Explore case
Alabama
Mar 2015

Immigrants' Rights
Smart Justice
Hispanic Interest Coalition of Alabama v. Bentley
The Alabama state legislature passed a draconian anti-immigrant law in June, 2011, the toughest of several state laws modeled after Arizonas SB 1070. Like the Arizona law, SB 56 authorized police to ask for proof of citizenship or immigration status during a traffic stop based on reasonable suspicion that the person was an undocumented immigrant. The law went even further than Arizonas, with provisions that required public school officials to verify the immigration status of children and their parents, that made it a crime for undocumented immigrants to solicit work, and criminalized Alabamians for ordinary, everyday interactions with undocumented individuals like renting a mobile home or offering a ride.

Indiana
Feb 2015
Immigrants' Rights
Buquer, et al. v. City of Indianapolis
On May 25, 2011 the 勛圖眻畦 of Indiana, the 勛圖眻畦s Immigrants Rights Project, and the National Immigration Law Center (NILC). filed a class action lawsuit challenging a discriminatory Indiana law inspired by Arizonas notorious SB 1070. According to the lawsuit, the law unlawfully authorizes police to make warrantless arrests of individuals based on assumed immigration status and criminalizes the mere use or acceptance of the commonly used consular ID card. The groups charged that the law would lead to racial profiling and trample upon the rights of all Indiana residents in violation of the U.S. Constitution.
Explore case
Indiana
Feb 2015

Immigrants' Rights
Buquer, et al. v. City of Indianapolis
On May 25, 2011 the 勛圖眻畦 of Indiana, the 勛圖眻畦s Immigrants Rights Project, and the National Immigration Law Center (NILC). filed a class action lawsuit challenging a discriminatory Indiana law inspired by Arizonas notorious SB 1070. According to the lawsuit, the law unlawfully authorizes police to make warrantless arrests of individuals based on assumed immigration status and criminalizes the mere use or acceptance of the commonly used consular ID card. The groups charged that the law would lead to racial profiling and trample upon the rights of all Indiana residents in violation of the U.S. Constitution.