On July 15, 1986, plaintiffs filed their complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, challenging the constitutionality of section 214 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. § 1436a, and certain HUD regulations implementing section 214, both ...
read more >
On July 15, 1986, plaintiffs filed their complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, challenging the constitutionality of section 214 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. § 1436a, and certain HUD regulations implementing section 214, both of which restricted federal housing assistance for the exclusive benefit of U.S. citizens and certain eligible aliens.
On December 18, 1986, the District Court granted plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction and certified this case as a class action, defining the class as: "All United States citizens and 'eligible aliens' as defined in 42 U.S.C. § 1436a nationwide who would be eligible, either presently or prospectively, for subsidized housing under the United States Housing Act of 1937, section 235 or 236 of the National Housing Act, or section 101 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965, but for the presence in the family of an adult who is an ineligible alien."
Subsequently, Congress amended section 214, and HUD issued new implementing regulations. Plaintiffs in turn filed an amended complaint on August 21, 1995. The government moved to dismiss, or, in the alternative, for summary judgment.
On March 8, 1996, the District Court (Judge Milton L. Schwartz) granted defendant's motion to dismiss second claim for relief (alleged that section 214 constitutes an improper delegation of legislative Power) and plaintiffs' seventh claim for relief (challenged defendant's findings under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. § 605(b), and Executive Order 12291). The motion was denied with respect to the remainder of plaintiffs' claims. Yolano-Donnelly, et al v. Cisneros, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22778 (Mar. 8, 1996).
In October, 1996, the parties reached a settlement of the case and filed a joint motion for court approval. Judge Schwartz entered an order and judgment approving the class action settlement on February 20, 1997. The case was dismissed, with the Court retaining jurisdiction to enforce the Settlement Agreement for a period of 3 years. Plaintiffs' claim for attorneys' fees was subsequent resolved.Dan Dalton - 10/22/2007