University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Rosenblum v. John Does 1-10 PN-OR-0006
Docket / Court 3:20-cv-01161 ( D. Or. )
State/Territory Oregon
Case Type(s) Policing
Special Collection Litigation Against Federal Police (2020)
Police Violence Protests (Spring/Summer 2020)
Case Summary
This lawsuit was filed by the State of Oregon through Ellen Rosenblum, the Oregon Attorney General, on July 17, 2020 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. The State sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Marshals Service ( ... read more >
This lawsuit was filed by the State of Oregon through Ellen Rosenblum, the Oregon Attorney General, on July 17, 2020 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. The State sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Marshals Service (USMS), and Federal Protective Service, as well as ten unnamed and unidentified law enforcement officers. The complaint alleged that these federal agencies were involved in detaining people in Portland, hauling them into unmarked vehicles, and taking them to the courthouse without a warrant. President Trump began deploying these federal agencies to Portland in mid-July of 2020, in response to the protests that took place in that city since the police killing of George Floyd in May of 2020.

The complaint alleged violations of the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments, and that the defendants' actions constituted a public nuisance. The First Amendment charge argued that the federal government took these actions to discourage protests against racial inequality, therefore violating residents' freedom of expression. The Fourth Amendment charge accused the agencies of unreasonable seizures, alleging that in at least one case the agents did not have a warrant to arrest a man. The Fifth Amendment complaint argued that these actions also represented a deprivation of liberty without due process of law. Finally, the public nuisance allegation claimed that the federal agencies unreasonably interfered with the public's right to safety, peace, comfort, and convenience. The State of Oregon sought declaratory relief and injunctive relief in the form of a permanent injunction that would bar defendants from these tactics and also requiring that they identify themselves and their agency, explain to detainees why they were being arrested, and refrain from arresting people without probable cause or a warrant.

The case was assigned to Judge Marco A. Hernandez, but then reassigned to Judge Michael M. Mosman.

Three days later, the State of Oregon submitted a motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO), requesting that the court enjoin the defendants from detaining individuals without a warrant, to mandate that defendants identify themselves and their agencies, and to explain to any detainee why they were being arrested. The defendants filed a memo in opposition, arguing that the State did not have standing. They also argued that the plaintiff was unlikely to succeed on the merits, would not suffer irreparable harm, and that the balance of equities and public interest was not in the plaintiff's favor.

On July 24, Judge Mosman denied the plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order because the State of Oregon lacked standing to succeed in the lawsuit. 2020 WL 4253209. In order to for the State of Oregon to have standing to sue on behalf of its citizens under the parens patriae doctrine, the State of Oregon needed to make a very particularized showing, but Judge Mosman found that the State of Oregon had failed to articulate a distinct interest from the interests of private parties and that the State was more than a nominal party. In additional, Judge Mosman found that even if the State had parens patriae standing, there was not enough evidence that unlawful seizures were likely to continue in the future and thus, the State still had not met its burden to show it had standing for injunctive relief.

That same day, the City of Portland filed a motion requesting to appear and participate as amicus curiae. That motion was granted on July 27.

On September 16, 2020, the State of Oregon voluntarily dismissed the case, as the federal agents had stopped engaging in the allegedly illegal behavior. The case is now closed.

Jack Hibbard - 10/07/2020


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Constitutional Clause
Due Process
Freedom of speech/association
Petitions clause
Unreasonable search and seizure
Defendant-type
Jurisdiction-wide
General
Over/Unlawful Detention
Plaintiff Type
State Plaintiff
Causes of Action 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
State law
Defendant(s) Federal Protective Service
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
United States Department of Homeland Security
United States Marshals Service
Plaintiff Description State of Oregon through AG Ellen Rosenblum
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted No
Filed Pro Se No
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Defendant stopped allegedly illegal actions
Source of Relief Litigation
Form of Settlement Voluntary Dismissal
Filed 07/17/2020
Case Closing Year 2020
Case Ongoing No
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
  See this case at CourtListener.com (May provide additional documents and, for active cases, real-time alerts)
Docket(s)
3:20-cv-01161 (D. Or.)
PN-OR-0006-9000.pdf | Detail
Date: 09/16/2020
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Complaint [ECF# 1]
PN-OR-0006-0001.pdf | Detail
Date: 07/17/2020
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Motion for Temporary Restraining Order [ECF# 5]
PN-OR-0006-0002.pdf | Detail
Date: 07/20/2020
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
[Declarations in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Temporary Restraining Order] [ECF# 7, 8, 9, 10 & 11]
PN-OR-0006-0004.pdf | Detail
Date: 07/20/2020
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction [ECF# 15]
PN-OR-0006-0003.pdf | Detail
Date: 07/22/2020
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Opinion and Order [ECF# 23] (2020 WL 4253209) (D. Or.)
PN-OR-0006-0005.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Date: 07/24/2020
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Plaintiff's Notice of Voluntary Dismissal [ECF# 28]
PN-OR-0006-0006.pdf | Detail
Date: 09/16/2020
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
show all people docs
Judges Mosman, Michael W. (FISC, D. Or.) show/hide docs
PN-OR-0006-0005 | PN-OR-0006-9000
Plaintiff's Lawyers Lippold, Steven M (Oregon) show/hide docs
PN-OR-0006-0001 | PN-OR-0006-0002 | PN-OR-0006-0004 | PN-OR-0006-0006 | PN-OR-0006-9000
Potter, Sheila (Oregon) show/hide docs
PN-OR-0006-0001 | PN-OR-0006-0002 | PN-OR-0006-0004 | PN-OR-0006-0006 | PN-OR-0006-9000
Rosenblum, Ellen F. (Oregon) show/hide docs
PN-OR-0006-0001 | PN-OR-0006-0002 | PN-OR-0006-0004 | PN-OR-0006-0006
Defendant's Lawyers Berman, Keri L. (District of Columbia) show/hide docs
PN-OR-0006-0003
Davis, Ethan P. (District of Columbia) show/hide docs
PN-OR-0006-0003
Haas, Alexander K (District of Columbia) show/hide docs
PN-OR-0006-0003
Hall, Jeffrey A (District of Columbia) show/hide docs
PN-OR-0006-0003
Morrell, David Michael (District of Columbia) show/hide docs
PN-OR-0006-0003 | PN-OR-0006-9000
Rosenberg, Brad P. (District of Columbia) show/hide docs
PN-OR-0006-0003
Von Bokern, Jordan L (District of Columbia) show/hide docs
PN-OR-0006-0003
Warden, Andrew Irwin (District of Columbia) show/hide docs
PN-OR-0006-0003 | PN-OR-0006-9000
Williams, Billy J (District of Columbia) show/hide docs
PN-OR-0006-0003

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -