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
175 Immigrants' Rights Cases

Court Case
Sep 2012
Immigrants' Rights
Quezada v. Mink
In April 2010, the 勛圖眻畦 of Colorado and 勛圖眻畦 Immigrants' Rights Project filed a lawsuit in a Denver federal court against the sheriff of Jefferson County in Colorado arguing that he illegally imprisoned a Colorado resident for 47 days with no charges pending against him simply because federal immigration officers suspected that the man was in the country in violation of federal immigration laws.
Explore case
Court Case
Sep 2012

Immigrants' Rights
Quezada v. Mink
In April 2010, the 勛圖眻畦 of Colorado and 勛圖眻畦 Immigrants' Rights Project filed a lawsuit in a Denver federal court against the sheriff of Jefferson County in Colorado arguing that he illegally imprisoned a Colorado resident for 47 days with no charges pending against him simply because federal immigration officers suspected that the man was in the country in violation of federal immigration laws.

U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2012
Immigrants' Rights
Arizona v. United States
Whether Arizona's effort to enforce federal immigration law by creating its own rules for the interrogation, arrest and detention of undocumented persons is unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2012

Immigrants' Rights
Arizona v. United States
Whether Arizona's effort to enforce federal immigration law by creating its own rules for the interrogation, arrest and detention of undocumented persons is unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause.

Court Case
Sep 2011
Immigrants' Rights
+2 Issues
Minneci v. Pollard
Whether private prison officials can be sued for violating the constitutional rights of federal prisoners?
Explore case
Court Case
Sep 2011

Immigrants' Rights
+2 Issues
Minneci v. Pollard
Whether private prison officials can be sued for violating the constitutional rights of federal prisoners?

U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2011
Immigrants' Rights
+2 Issues
Flores-Villar v. United States
Whether the government may constitutionally make it more difficult for citizen fathers than citizen mothers to transmit citizenship to their out-of-wedlock children born outside the U.S.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2011

Immigrants' Rights
+2 Issues
Flores-Villar v. United States
Whether the government may constitutionally make it more difficult for citizen fathers than citizen mothers to transmit citizenship to their out-of-wedlock children born outside the U.S.

U.S. Supreme Court
May 2011
Immigrants' Rights
Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting
(formerly Chamber of Commerce v. Candelaria)
Whether an Arizona law imposing severe sanctions on employers who hire immigrants that the state believes are unauthorized to work in the United States, and requiring employers to participate in a federal employment verification program that the federal government made voluntary, is pre-empted by the carefully calibrated and comprehensive scheme that the federal government has enacted to regulate immigration.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2011

Immigrants' Rights
Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting
(formerly Chamber of Commerce v. Candelaria)
Whether an Arizona law imposing severe sanctions on employers who hire immigrants that the state believes are unauthorized to work in the United States, and requiring employers to participate in a federal employment verification program that the federal government made voluntary, is pre-empted by the carefully calibrated and comprehensive scheme that the federal government has enacted to regulate immigration.