University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name City of New York v. Sessions IM-NY-0066
Docket / Court 1:18-cv-06474-ER ( S.D.N.Y. )
State/Territory New York
Case Type(s) Immigration and/or the Border
Special Collection Take Care
Case Summary
On July 18, 2018, the City of New York filed a complaint against the Attorney General of the U.S. and the Department of the Justice in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The City alleged that the defendants imposed new immigration-related conditions on the Edward Byrne ... read more >
On July 18, 2018, the City of New York filed a complaint against the Attorney General of the U.S. and the Department of the Justice in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The City alleged that the defendants imposed new immigration-related conditions on the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the Spending Clause, the Tenth Amendment, and separation of powers. The City, represented by private counsel, sought to enjoin defendants from imposing new conditions on congressionally approved federal funding for the JAG program because these conditions are arbitrary and capricious. The City further sought a declaration that Section 1373 of Title 8 of the United States Code ("Section 1373") is unconstitutional, or, to the extent that Section 1373 lawfully applies to the JAG program, a declaration that the City's laws and policies comply with Section 1373.

A couple of days later, on July 20, 2018, DOJ released the FY 2018 JAG award solicitation and sought to impose new immigration-related conditions on grantees in addition to those imposed on FY 2017 grantees. Any recipient that accepts the FY 2018 award would also need to certify that it would not violate 8 U.S.C. § 1644, a federal statute prohibiting restrictions on sharing information about an individual’s immigration status with federal authorities. In light of this, the City filed an amended complaint on August 6 to seek additional relief.

On August 17, the City filed a motion for partial summary judgment. On September 14, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss or alternatively, motion for partial summary judgment. On November 30, Judge Edgardo Ramos granted the plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment and denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss and motion for partial summary judgment. The court held that the conditions were not in accordance with the APA, violated the anticommandeering doctrine of the Tenth Amendment, and violated the constitutional separation of powers. However, the motion for summary judgment with respect to the Spending Clause was denied as moot. The defendants were enjoined from imposing or enforcing the conditions.

On January 28, 2019, the defendants filed an interlocutory appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Back in district court, the City again filed a motion for partial summary judgment. These competing motions remained in limbo for nearly a year until, in February 2020, the Second Circuit reversed the district court's initial finding and directed it to enter partial summary judgment in favor of the U.S. Attorney General and the Department of Justice.

However, before the case was concluded, the Biden administration took over and reversed course. The case was stayed on March 19, 2021, and in the following month, on April 30, 2021, the case was voluntarily dismissed by both parties. This case is now closed.

Sichun Liu - 03/08/2019
Sean Drohan - 07/01/2021


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Constitutional Clause
Federalism (including 10th Amendment)
Content of Injunction
Preliminary relief denied
Preliminary relief granted
Discrimination-basis
Immigration status
General
Record-keeping
Records Disclosure
Immigration/Border
Deportation - procedure
Detention - procedures
Undocumented immigrants - rights and duties
Undocumented immigrants - state and local regulation
Plaintiff Type
City/County Plaintiff
Type of Facility
Government-run
Causes of Action Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq.
Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Defendant(s) U.S. Department of Justice
Plaintiff Description The City of New York
Class action status sought No
Class action status outcome Not sought
Filed Pro Se No
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer No
Nature of Relief None
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Voluntary Dismissal
Filed 07/18/2018
Case Closing Year 2021
Case Ongoing No
Case Listing IM-NY-0065 : State of New York v. U.S. Department of Justice (S.D.N.Y.)
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
  See this case at CourtListener.com (May provide additional documents and, for active cases, real-time alerts)
Court Docket(s)
S.D.N.Y.
05/03/2021
1:18-cv-6474
IM-NY-0066-9000.pdf | Detail
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
S.D.N.Y.
07/18/2018
Complaint for Declaratory, Injunctive, and Mandamus Relief [ECF# 1]
IM-NY-0066-0005.pdf | Detail
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
S.D.N.Y.
08/06/2018
First Amended Complaint [ECF# 15]
IM-NY-0066-0001.pdf | Detail
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
S.D.N.Y.
11/30/2018
Opinion and Order [ECF# 81] (343 F.Supp.3d 213)
IM-NY-0066-0002.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
U.S. Court of Appeals
02/26/2020
[Opinion] [Ct. of App. ECF# 198] (951 F.3d 84)
IM-NY-0066-0003.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
S.D.N.Y.
04/30/2021
Stipulation of Dismissal [ECF# 138]
IM-NY-0066-0004.pdf | Detail
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
show all people docs
Judges Cabranes, José Alberto (FISCR, D. Conn., Second Circuit) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-0003
Raggi, Reena (E.D.N.Y., Second Circuit) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-0003
Ramos, Edgardo (S.D.N.Y.) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-0002 | IM-NY-0066-9000
Winter, Ralph K. Jr. (FISCR, Second Circuit) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-0003
Plaintiff's Lawyers Attie, Jessica (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-9000
Bernhardt, Doris F. (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-0001 | IM-NY-0066-0004 | IM-NY-0066-0005 | IM-NY-0066-9000
Carter, Zachary W. (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-0001 | IM-NY-0066-0005
Fishbein, Matthew E. (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-0001 | IM-NY-0066-0005 | IM-NY-0066-9000
Hamid, Jyotin R. (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-9000
Holt, Meryl (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-0001 | IM-NY-0066-0005 | IM-NY-0066-9000
Jenerette, Tonya (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-0001 | IM-NY-0066-0005 | IM-NY-0066-9000
Johnson, James E. (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-0004
Krishnan, Sabita Lakshmi (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-0001 | IM-NY-0066-0004 | IM-NY-0066-0005 | IM-NY-0066-9000
Rehnquist, Dana (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-9000
Rubin, Gail (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-0001
Trasande, Nancy Milagros (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Bowen, Brigham J. (District of Columbia) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-0004
Boynton, Brian M (District of Columbia) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-0004
Mauler, Daniel (District of Columbia) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-9000
Roberts, Charles E.T. (District of Columbia) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-0004 | IM-NY-0066-9000
Other Lawyers Gans, David H. (District of Columbia) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0066-9000

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -