On September 26, 2007, attorneys and law student interns with the Jerome N. Frank Legal Services Organization of the Yale Law School filed a civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, New Haven Division, alleging discriminatory and ...
read more >
On September 26, 2007, attorneys and law student interns with the Jerome N. Frank Legal Services Organization of the Yale Law School filed a civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, New Haven Division, alleging discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against Latino residents of the city of Danbury, Connecticut, in violation of the First, Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, as well as the Connecticut Constitution and state common law.
Specifically, Plaintiffs alleged that the Mayor and the Danbury Police Department engaged in an unlawful campaign against immigrant and Latino communities, which included targeting Latinos for pretextual traffic stops for the purpose of investigating their immigration status. Plaintiffs alleged that officers would search detained drivers’ names in the FBI's National Crime Information Center (“NCIC”) database, arrest them for civil immigration violations, and then turn the arrestees over to ICE for deportation.
Plaintiffs further alleged that, as part of the Mayor’s plan to rid the city of immigrants, the Danbury Police Department conducted a September 19, 2006 immigration raid with ICE officials, during which eleven Latino day-laborers (the “Danbury 11”) who had gathered at a Danbury park were arrested, detained, and turned over to ICE. Nine of the eleven arrested laborers were plaintiffs in the instant lawsuit. Plaintiffs alleged that the eleven men were racially profiled and arrested without probable cause. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief and compensatory and punitive damages for the alleged violations.
An Amended Complaint was filed on November 26, 2007. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Donna F. Martinez for entry of a scheduling order and to supervise discovery. On February 01, 2008, Defendants filed a motion to disqualify Plaintiffs’ counsel. On July 03, 2008, Judge Martinez denied Defendant’s Motion to Disqualify. Following that, both parties filed numerous motions regarding various issues in discovery and Magistrate Judge Martinez ruled accordingly.
A Second Amended Complaint was filed on October 01, 2009.
On February 22, 2011, the case was dismissed without prejudice as both parties reported that this action had been settled in full. The terms of the settlement are not available at the time of this writing.Xin Chen - 05/03/2011