University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Buquer v. City of Indianapolis IM-IN-0002
Docket / Court 1:11-cv-00708-SEB-MJD ( S.D. Ind. )
State/Territory Indiana
Case Type(s) Immigration
Attorney Organization ACLU Chapters (any)
ACLU National (all projects)
Case Summary
On May 25, 2011, three foreign residents of Indiana filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, against the cities of Indianapolis and Franklin and the counties of Marion and Johnson. The plaintiffs, represented by the ACLU of ... read more >
On May 25, 2011, three foreign residents of Indiana filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, against the cities of Indianapolis and Franklin and the counties of Marion and Johnson. The plaintiffs, represented by the ACLU of Indiana, the national ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project, the National Immigration Law Center, and private counsel, filed their suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101 et seq., and the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201, claiming that Indiana's Senate Enrolled Act 590 (SEA 590) violated the federal Constitution. Specifically, the plaintiffs claimed that Section 19, which allowed local law enforcement officers to make warrantless arrests of people who were subject to a removal order issued by an immigration court or a detainer or notice of action issued by the Department of Homeland Security, or who had been indicted or convicted of an aggravated felony, was preempted by federal law and constituted an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment and a violation of due process under the Fourteenth. They also claimed that Section 18, which made the use of consular identification cards for identification within the state a civil infraction punishable by fine, was preempted by federal law and in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of due process. The plaintiffs sought a declaration that SEA 590 violated the Constitution and a peremptory injunction barring its enforcement before it came into effect on July 1, 2011.

On June 13, 2011, Mexico moved for leave to file an amicus on behalf of plaintiffs, and Brazil, Guatemala, El Salvador and Columbia moved to join it. The District Court (Judge Sarah Evans Barker) granted these motions on June 21.

In the meantime, the Court (Judge Barker), on joint motion from plaintiffs and county defendants, had issued an order to protect the privacy and confidentiality of any of the individual plaintiffs' immigration status that might be implicated in discovery.

Following a hearing on June 20, 2011, on June 24 the Court (Judge Barker) granted plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, barring enforcement of Sections 18 and 19 of SEA 590 pending further order of the Court. Buquer v. City of Indianapolis, 797 F. Supp. 2d 905 (S.D. Ind. 2011).

On July 14, 2011, the Court (Judge Barker) granted a stipulation by plaintiffs and county defendants that two classes should be certified: a class of people in Marion and Johnson Counties who were or would be subject to warrantless arrest pursuant to Section 19 of SEA 590 (Class A), and a class of people who possessed, or would possess, a valid consular identification card and were using it, or would use it, for non-fraudulent identification purposes (Class B). The court certified both classes and appointed counsel for them.

On October 11, 2011, the county defendants filed a motion to join the United States as a necessary party. The Court (Judge Barker) denied this motion on January 9, 2012. Buquer v. City of Indianapolis, No. 1:11-cv-00708, 2012 WL 76141, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3047 (S.D. Ind. Jan. 9, 2012). The Court (Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore) also denied a motion by defendants to stay the case pending the Supreme Court's decision in Arizona v. United States, No. 11-182 (IM-AZ-0015), remarking that it was unlikely to be entirely dispositive of some of the unique issues presented by this case.

Meanwhile, plaintiffs had filed a motion for summary judgment on November 20, 2011, and the City of Indianapolis had filed a cross-motion for summary judgment on December 21.

On March 28, 2013, the District Court (Judge Barker) granted plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment. According to the order, defendants are permanently enjoined from enforcing Section 18 and Section 20 of SEA 590, as they are both violated the Supremacy Clause and the Due Process Clause. Because plaintiffs' suit was dependent upon enforcement of these sections, the matter was dismissed without prejudice.

Christopher Schad - 06/19/2012


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Constitutional Clause
Due Process
Federalism
Unreasonable search and seizure
Defendant-type
Jurisdiction-wide
General
International law
Immigration
Constitutional rights
Detention - criteria
Detention - procedures
Undocumented immigrants - state and local regulation
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Causes of Action Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101 et seq.
Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201
42 U.S.C. § 1983
Defendant(s) City of Franklin
City of Indianapolis
Johnson County
Marion County
Plaintiff Description Two classes of people who are or will be in Marion and Johnson Counties, Indiana: (A) those who are or will be subject to warrantless arrest pursuant to Section 19 of SEA 590; and (B) those who possess, or will possess, a valid consular identification card and are using it, or will use it, for non-fraudulent identification purposes
Indexed Lawyer Organizations ACLU Chapters (any)
ACLU National (all projects)
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted Yes
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Litigation
Form of Settlement None on record
Order Duration not on record
Case Closing Year 2013
Case Ongoing No
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
Case Studies Threats to the Future of the Immigration Class Action
Washington University Journal of Law and Policy
By: Jill E. Family (Widener University School of Law)
Citation: 27 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol'y 71 (2008)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

Docket(s)
1:11-cv-00708-SEB-MJD (S.D. Ind.) 03/29/2013
IM-IN-0002-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Class Action Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief/Notice of Challenge to Constitutionality of State Statute 05/25/2011
IM-IN-0002-0001.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Protective Order 06/17/2011 (S.D. Ind.)
IM-IN-0002-0002.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction 06/24/2011 (797 F.Supp.2d 905) (S.D. Ind.)
IM-IN-0002-0003.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order [Certifying Class Action] 07/14/2011 (S.D. Ind.)
IM-IN-0002-0004.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
[Plaintiffs'] Memorandum of Law in Support of [Their] Motion for Summary Judgment 11/20/2011
IM-IN-0002-0005.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Defendant City of Indianapolis’s Response in Opposition to [Plaintiffs' Motion for] Summary Judgment and Brief in Support of its Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment 12/21/2011
IM-IN-0002-0006.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Plaintiffs' Reply in Support of [Their] Motion for Summary Judgment and Response in Opposition to City's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment 01/04/2012
IM-IN-0002-0007.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order [Denying the State Defendants' Motion to Join the United States as a Necessary Party] 01/09/2012 (2012 WL 76141 / 2012 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 3047) (S.D. Ind.)
IM-IN-0002-0008.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Defendant City of Indianapolis’s Reply in Support of its Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment 01/23/2012
IM-IN-0002-0009.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Plaintiffs' Surreply in Opposition to City's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment 01/30/2012
IM-IN-0002-0010.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order 03/09/2012 (2012 WL 829666) (S.D. Ind.)
IM-IN-0002-0013.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
[County Defendants'] Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment 04/09/2012
IM-IN-0002-0011.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Plaintiffs' Reply in Support of [Their] Motion for Summary Judgment 04/20/2012
IM-IN-0002-0012.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Denying Motion to Intervene and Denying as Moot Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration and Motion to Strike 03/28/2013 (2013 WL 1332137) (S.D. Ind.)
IM-IN-0002-0014.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order on Pending Summary Judgment Motions 03/28/2013 (2013 WL 1332158) (S.D. Ind.)
IM-IN-0002-0015.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Barker, Sarah Evans (S.D. Ind.)
IM-IN-0002-0002 | IM-IN-0002-0003 | IM-IN-0002-0004 | IM-IN-0002-0008 | IM-IN-0002-0014 | IM-IN-0002-0015 | IM-IN-0002-9000
Dinsmore, Mark. J. (S.D. Ind.) [Magistrate]
IM-IN-0002-0013 | IM-IN-0002-9000
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Adams, Angela Denise (Indiana)
IM-IN-0002-0001 | IM-IN-0002-0005 | IM-IN-0002-0007 | IM-IN-0002-0010 | IM-IN-0002-0012 | IM-IN-0002-9000
Cheer, Shiu-Ming (California)
IM-IN-0002-0001 | IM-IN-0002-0010 | IM-IN-0002-9000
Desormeau, Katherine (California)
IM-IN-0002-0001 | IM-IN-0002-0005 | IM-IN-0002-0007 | IM-IN-0002-0010 | IM-IN-0002-0012 | IM-IN-0002-9000
Falk, Kenneth J. (Indiana)
IM-IN-0002-0001 | IM-IN-0002-0007 | IM-IN-0002-0010 | IM-IN-0002-0012 | IM-IN-0002-9000
Gelernt, Lee (New York)
IM-IN-0002-0001 | IM-IN-0002-0005 | IM-IN-0002-0007 | IM-IN-0002-0010 | IM-IN-0002-0012 | IM-IN-0002-9000
Jadwat, Omar C. (New York)
IM-IN-0002-0001 | IM-IN-0002-0005 | IM-IN-0002-0007 | IM-IN-0002-0010 | IM-IN-0002-0012 | IM-IN-0002-9000
Joaquin, Linton (California)
IM-IN-0002-0001 | IM-IN-0002-0005 | IM-IN-0002-0007 | IM-IN-0002-0010 | IM-IN-0002-0012 | IM-IN-0002-9000
Rose, Gavin Minor (Indiana)
IM-IN-0002-0005 | IM-IN-0002-0007 | IM-IN-0002-0010 | IM-IN-0002-0012 | IM-IN-0002-9000
Segura, Andre Ivan (New York)
IM-IN-0002-0001 | IM-IN-0002-0005 | IM-IN-0002-0007 | IM-IN-0002-0010 | IM-IN-0002-0012 | IM-IN-0002-9000
Tumlin, Karen C. (California)
IM-IN-0002-0001 | IM-IN-0002-0005 | IM-IN-0002-0007 | IM-IN-0002-0010 | IM-IN-0002-0012 | IM-IN-0002-9000
Wang, Cecillia D (California)
IM-IN-0002-0001 | IM-IN-0002-0005 | IM-IN-0002-0007 | IM-IN-0002-0010 | IM-IN-0002-0012 | IM-IN-0002-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Banta, Donald G. (Indiana)
IM-IN-0002-0011
Barrett, William W. (Indiana)
IM-IN-0002-9000
Clay, Adam (Indiana)
IM-IN-0002-9000
Erdmann, Patricia Orloff (Indiana)
IM-IN-0002-0011 | IM-IN-0002-9000
Garn, Jefferson S. (Indiana)
IM-IN-0002-0011 | IM-IN-0002-9000
Gray, Lynnette (Indiana)
IM-IN-0002-9000
Isenberg, Betsy M (Indiana)
IM-IN-0002-0011 | IM-IN-0002-9000
Joel, Kenneth Lawson (Indiana)
IM-IN-0002-0011 | IM-IN-0002-9000
Roebel, Justin F. (Indiana)
IM-IN-0002-0006 | IM-IN-0002-0009
Spotts, Jillian Leigh (Indiana)
IM-IN-0002-9000
Will, Alexander Phillip (Indiana)
IM-IN-0002-9000
Zoeller, Gregory F. (Indiana)
IM-IN-0002-0011
Other Lawyers Behar, Jose Jorge (Illinois)
IM-IN-0002-9000
Julian, Jill Z. (Indiana)
IM-IN-0002-9000
Karsh, Joshua (Illinois)
IM-IN-0002-9000
Piers, Matthew J. (Illinois)
IM-IN-0002-9000
Reeves, C Lee II (District of Columbia)
IM-IN-0002-9000

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -