University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
view search results
page permalink
Case Name Castro v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security IM-PA-0012
Docket / Court 5:15-cv-06153-PD ( E.D. Pa. )
State/Territory Pennsylvania
Case Type(s) Immigration and/or the Border
Attorney Organization ACLU Chapters (any)
ACLU National (all projects)
Case Summary
On November 16, 2015, an asylum-seeking woman from Central America and her minor child filed a petition for habeas corpus in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Represented by the ACLU, the petitioners sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, challenging DHS's ... read more >
On November 16, 2015, an asylum-seeking woman from Central America and her minor child filed a petition for habeas corpus in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Represented by the ACLU, the petitioners sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, challenging DHS's determination that the petitioners were subject to “expedited removal”, having been apprehended and screened shortly after illegally crossing the southern border of the United States. The petitioners were subsequently detained pending removal in Pennsylvania.

Specifically, the petitioners asked the court to review DHS’s expedited removal determination, alleging that DHS’s finding—that the petitioners lacked a “credible fear of torture”—had been made subject to an inadequate evaluation process. The petitioners were ordered to be removed after an interview with a government officer, without a full opportunity to present their claim and be heard by an immigration judge, to which they were entitled under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1). The claim for relief asked that the court reject the negative credible fear determination, vacate the expedited removal orders, and order DHS to restart the removal process.

On November 16, 2015, the case was assigned to Judge Paul S. Diamond. On December 16, The District Court granted the petitioners’ motion to stay removal pending the resolution of their claim. On February 16, 2015, the Court dismissed the petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and removed the temporary stay of removal. In the Court’s opinion, Judge Diamond found that the Immigration and Nationality Act limited judicial review of expedited order decisions.

The petitioners appealed the District Court’s ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. On June 15, 2016, the petitioners filed an emergency motion to stay removal pending the appeal, which the District Court granted the next day. On August 29, 2016, the Court of Appeals (Judges Thomas Hardiman, D. Brooks Smith, and Patty Shwartz) affirmed the District Court’s ruling. Judge Smith delivered a precedential opinion, holding that because Congress had limited the scope of judicial review over admission or exclusion of aliens, the court lacked jurisdiction to review DHS’s decision. Castro v. U.S. Dep't of Homeland Sec., 835 F.3d 422 (3d Cir. 2016).

On December 22, 2016, the petitioners filed a petition for writ of certiorari, which was denied in April 2017. The case is closed.

Nicholas Hazen - 02/14/2017


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Defendant-type
Jurisdiction-wide
General
Access to lawyers or judicial system
Habeas Corpus
Immigration/Border
Asylum - criteria
Asylum - procedure
Deportation - criteria
Deportation - judicial review
Deportation - procedure
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Causes of Action Habeas Corpus, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2241-2253; 2254; 2255
Defendant(s) United States
Plaintiff Description Twenty-nine Central American women and their thirty-five minor children seeking Asylum in the United States.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations ACLU Chapters (any)
ACLU National (all projects)
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted No
Prevailing Party Defendant
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief None
Source of Relief None
Case Ongoing No
Docket(s)
5:15-cv-6153 (E.D. Pa.)
IM-PA-0012-9000.pdf | Detail
Date: 09/02/2016
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Order of Temporary Stay of Removal [ECF# 5] (E.D. Pa.)
IM-PA-0012-0002.pdf | Detail
Date: 11/19/2015
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Memorandum [ECF# 54] (E.D. Pa.)
IM-PA-0012-0001.pdf | Detail
Date: 02/16/2016
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Precedential Opinion [Ct. of App. ECF# 003112392295] (835 F.3d 422)
IM-PA-0012-0003.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Date: 08/29/2016
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Diamond, Paul Steven (E.D. Pa.)
IM-PA-0012-0001 | IM-PA-0012-0002 | IM-PA-0012-9000
Hardiman, Thomas Michael (W.D. Pa., Third Circuit)
IM-PA-0012-0003
Smith, David Brooks (W.D. Pa., Third Circuit)
IM-PA-0012-0003
Plaintiff's Lawyers Gelernt, Lee (New York)
IM-PA-0012-9000
Kang, Stephen B. (California)
IM-PA-0012-9000
Nash, Lindsay (New York)
IM-PA-0012-9000
Newell, Jennifer Chang (California)
IM-PA-0012-9000
Roper, Mary Catherine (Pennsylvania)
IM-PA-0012-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Darrow, Joseph A. (District of Columbia)
IM-PA-0012-9000
Reuveni, Erez (District of Columbia)
IM-PA-0012-9000
Other Lawyers Feinberg, Jonathan H. (Pennsylvania)
IM-PA-0012-9000
Harvey, Stephen G. (Pennsylvania)
IM-PA-0012-9000

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
view search results
page permalink

- top of page -