The State of California filed this suit on February 7, 2018, seeking to compel the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to produce records under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The State sought records related to DOJ's recent decision to impose certain immigration enforcement related conditions that local jurisdictions must meet to receive federal funding. In requesting these records, the State argued that it sought to better understand how the new conditions related to Congressional intent behind the funding program, as well as the authority under which they were imposed. The State argued that the conditions could risk public safety in some local jurisdictions by undermining trust and cooperation between residents and law enforcement. The suit was brought in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

The complaint stated that the State had requested records from the DOJ's Office of Justice Programs (OJP) records concerning: (1) OJP's process in adding conditions and certification requirements related to immigration enforcement for the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program (JAG); and (2) OJP’s decision to require the California Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) to submit a legal opinion verifying compliance with 8 U.S.C. § 1373 (Section 1373), which prohibited restrictions on sharing information related to immigration or citizenship status. Specifically, the State sought records related to the following conditions that OJP had recently added to the JAG program that must be met for a state to receive JAG funding: (1) a state must have statute, policy, or practice to ensure that federal agents have access to any state correctional facilities in order to determine if detainees are immigrants with a right to be in the U.S.; (2) a state must provide notice to DHS of a scheduled release date of a detainee who is also an immigrant if DHS requests such notice; and (3) a state must certify compliance with Section 1373.

The complaint noted that all three of these conditions were separately challenged in State of California v. Session, No. 17-cv-4701, found here .

The case was assigned to Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero on Feb. 7, 2018. The initial case management conference was scheduled for May 11, 2018. The case management process has since been extended through multiple continuances at the request of the parties.

The case is ongoing.

Virginia Weeks - 02/11/2018


compress summary