On December 14, 2006, attorneys and law student interns with the Jerome N. Frank Legal Services Organization of the Yale Law School, filed a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 ("FOIA") in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, seeking to compel the ...
read more >
On December 14, 2006, attorneys and law student interns with the Jerome N. Frank Legal Services Organization of the Yale Law School, filed a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 ("FOIA") in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, seeking to compel the release of government records regarding an undercover sting operation targeting day laborers in Danbury, Connecticut. The sting, which was carried out by the Immigration and Custom Enforcement Division of the Department of Homeland Security on September 19, 2006, was the subject of a separate lawsuit styled Barrera v. Boughton, case no. 3:07-cv-01436-RNC (D.Conn.). See IM-CT-0006 of this collection.
The Government eventually produced redacted versions of the requested alien files ("A files") for nine of the eleven day laborers arrested on September 19, 2006. The Government did not, however, produce records specifically relating to the September 19, 2006 raid and Plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction to compel production of those records. The District Court (Judge Robert N. Chatigny) denied Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction on September 6, 2007. The case was then referred to Magistrate Judge Donna F. Martinez to supervise discovery.
The Government informed Plaintiffs that it located only eight pages responsive to the FOIA request relating to the September 19, 2006 raid. Plaintiffs sought discovery to determine the reasonableness of the Government's search efforts and the Government moved for a protective order to block discovery. On November 27, 2007, Magistrate Judge Martinez granted the protective order, finding that discovery was premature at that point in the case.
The Government then moved for summary judgment. Plaintiffs filed a motion to stay consideration of the Government’s motion until it could conduct limited discovery. At the time of this summary, Plaintiffs’ request for a stay was still pending before the court.
On September 28, the Court (Robert N. Chatigny) approved a proposed order for settlement and dismissal, awarding Plaintiffs $16,000 and ending the case. Dan Dalton - 02/26/2008