Immigrants' Rights
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Aug 2021
Immigrants' Rights
Innovation Law Lab v. Wolf
The 吃瓜直播, 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 吃瓜直播 filed 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 吃瓜直播鈥檚 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 吃瓜直播 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 吃瓜直播, the 吃瓜直播 of 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 吃瓜直播 and the 吃瓜直播 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 governor鈥檚 actions violate the United States Constitution and federal law.
All Cases
175 Immigrants' Rights Cases
New Hampshire
Jun 2025
Immigrants' Rights
Barbara v. Donald J. Trump
Explore case
New Hampshire
Jun 2025
Immigrants' Rights
Barbara v. Donald J. Trump
Virginia
Jun 2025
Immigrants' Rights
Free Speech
Suri v. Trump
Whether someone with a valid visa within the U.S. can be arrested and detained on the basis of their protected political speech and familial associations.
Explore case
Virginia
Jun 2025
Immigrants' Rights
Free Speech
Suri v. Trump
Whether someone with a valid visa within the U.S. can be arrested and detained on the basis of their protected political speech and familial associations.
Texas
Jun 2025
Immigrants' Rights
M.A.P.S. v. Garite
Emergency lawsuit filed in federal court to again halt removals under the Alien Enemies Act for people within that court鈥檚 judicial district.
Explore case
Texas
Jun 2025
Immigrants' Rights
M.A.P.S. v. Garite
Emergency lawsuit filed in federal court to again halt removals under the Alien Enemies Act for people within that court鈥檚 judicial district.
Court Case
Jun 2025
Immigrants' Rights
Luna Gutierrez v. Noem
Explore case
Washington, D.C.
Jun 2025
Immigrants' Rights
J.G.G. v. TRUMP
The 吃瓜直播, Democracy Forward, and the 吃瓜直播 of the District of Columbia sued the Trump administration over the president鈥檚 unlawful and unprecedented invocation of the Alien Enemies Act. The Alien Enemies Act, passed in 1798, is a wartime authority providing that the president may 鈥� after a public proclamation 鈥� apprehend, restrain, and remove citizens of a foreign country that is engaged in a 鈥渄eclared war鈥� or 鈥渋nvasion or predatory incursion鈥� against the United States. The lawsuit charges that President Trump's invocation of a centuries-old wartime act unlawfully during peacetime to accelerate mass deportations, sidestepping the limits of this wartime authority and the procedures and protections in immigration law. The Alien Enemies Act鈥檚 previous use during wartime 鈥� for example, its invocation during World War II to justify the internment of people of Japanese ancestry 鈥� has correctly drawn sustained criticism. Employing it as a way to evade domestic laws in peacetime is fundamentally wrong.
Explore case
Washington, D.C.
Jun 2025
Immigrants' Rights
J.G.G. v. TRUMP
The 吃瓜直播, Democracy Forward, and the 吃瓜直播 of the District of Columbia sued the Trump administration over the president鈥檚 unlawful and unprecedented invocation of the Alien Enemies Act. The Alien Enemies Act, passed in 1798, is a wartime authority providing that the president may 鈥� after a public proclamation 鈥� apprehend, restrain, and remove citizens of a foreign country that is engaged in a 鈥渄eclared war鈥� or 鈥渋nvasion or predatory incursion鈥� against the United States. The lawsuit charges that President Trump's invocation of a centuries-old wartime act unlawfully during peacetime to accelerate mass deportations, sidestepping the limits of this wartime authority and the procedures and protections in immigration law. The Alien Enemies Act鈥檚 previous use during wartime 鈥� for example, its invocation during World War II to justify the internment of people of Japanese ancestry 鈥� has correctly drawn sustained criticism. Employing it as a way to evade domestic laws in peacetime is fundamentally wrong.