University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
view search results
page permalink
Case Name Perez v. Decker IM-NY-0081
Docket / Court 1:18-cv-10683-AJN ( S.D.N.Y. )
State/Territory New York
Case Type(s) Immigration and/or the Border
Attorney Organization Bronx Defenders
New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU)
Case Summary
This is a case about the indefinite detention of immigrants pending their removal proceedings by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”). On November 15, 2018, a 43-year-old New York resident who had been arrested and detained in a New York detention center filed this class action ... read more >
This is a case about the indefinite detention of immigrants pending their removal proceedings by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”). On November 15, 2018, a 43-year-old New York resident who had been arrested and detained in a New York detention center filed this class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The plaintiff, a husband and father of two, sued the U.S. government, including the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Department of Justice under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Represented by the Bronx Defenders, the New York Civil Liberties Union, the Cardozo Immigration Justice Clinic, and Make the Road New York, the plaintiff sought declaratory and injunctive relief for the class of plaintiffs who had been arrested and detained by ICE without probable cause and without a date of hearing. The plaintiff claimed that the U.S. government’s “practice of failing to provide first appearances before a judge for nearly three months after an arrest” violated the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, as well as the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) (5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq.).

The plaintiff filed a motion for preliminary injunctive relief and preliminary declaratory relief on December 5, 2018. District Judge Alison J. Nathan denied the plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunctive relief for lack of jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(f)(1), which prohibits any court (other than the Supreme Court) from enjoining or restraining the operations of 8 U.S.C. § 1229 on a class-wide basis. Section 1229, in turn, “prescribes a floor but no ceiling with respect to the timing of initial master calendar hearings.” Since the plaintiff asked the Court to impose a ceiling, Judge Nathan concluded that granting relief would impermissibly restrain § 1229's operations.

Judge Nathan also denied plaintiff’s motion for preliminary declaratory relief, concluding that no such relief existed. In response, the plaintiff and the defendants filed cross-motions for summary judgment on November 1, 2019. 2019 WL 4784950.

Judge Nathan granted the plaintiff’s unopposed motion for class certification, filed with the original complaint, on November 30, 2020. The Court defined the class as:
All individuals who have been, or will be, arrested by ICE’s New York Field Office and detained under Section 1226 of Title 8 of the United States Code for removal proceedings and who have not been provided an initial hearing before an immigration judge.
On the same day, Judge Nathan granted in part and denied in part both the plaintiff’s and the defendants’ motions for summary judgment. Judge Nathan granted summary judgment for the plaintiff on their procedural due process claim, finding that that the government’s practice of holding detainees for more than ten days before an initial hearing exceeded the 10-day limit established in Krimstock v. Kelly, 306 F.3d 40. But Judge Nathan granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the plaintiff’s substantive due process and APA claims. Judge Nathan cited Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, in which detention periods of up to six months were held to be reasonable, and concluded that the detention period at issue did not violate the plaintiff’s right to due process. Judge Nathan dismissed the plaintiff’s claim under the APA because granting relief under the APA would effectively allow the plaintiff to obtain preliminary injunctive relief, even though it had been denied pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(f). 2020 WL 7028637.

As of January 29, 2021, the defendants have filed an appeal.

Anjali Baliga - 02/07/2021


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Constitutional Clause
Due Process
Due Process: Procedural Due Process
Due Process: Substantive Due Process
Unreasonable search and seizure
Defendant-type
Law-enforcement
General
Access to lawyers or judicial system
Confinement/isolation
Fines/Fees/Bail/Bond
Habeas Corpus
Over/Unlawful Detention
Pattern or Practice
Placement in detention facilities
Timeliness of case assignment
Immigration/Border
Constitutional rights
Detention - criteria
Detention - procedures
Undocumented immigrants - rights and duties
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Special Case Type
Habeas
Type of Facility
Government-run
Causes of Action Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq.
Habeas Corpus, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2241-2253; 2254; 2255
Defendant(s) U.S. Department of Homeland Security
U.S. Department of Justice
Plaintiff Description All individuals who have been, or will be, arrested by ICE’s New York Field Office and detained under Section 1226 of Title 8 of the United States Code for removal proceedings and who have not been provided an initial hearing before an immigration judge.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations Bronx Defenders
New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU)
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted Yes
Filed Pro Se No
Prevailing Party None Yet / None
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Declaratory Judgment
Source of Relief Litigation
Filed 11/15/2018
Case Ongoing Yes
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.
01/29/2021
1:18-cv-10683-AJN
IM-NY-0081-9000.pdf | Detail
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
S.D.N.Y.
11/15/2018
Class Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Class Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief [ECF# 1]
IM-NY-0081-0001.pdf | Detail
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
S.D.N.Y.
09/30/2019
Opinion & Order [ECF# 124] (2019 WL 4784950)
IM-NY-0081-0002.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
S.D.N.Y.
11/30/2020
Opinion & Order [ECF# 160] (2020 WL 7028637)
IM-NY-0081-0003.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
show all people docs
Judges Nathan, Alison Julie (S.D.N.Y.) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0081-0002 | IM-NY-0081-0003 | IM-NY-0081-9000
Plaintiff's Lawyers Austin, Paige (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0081-9000
Borchetta, Jennifer Rolnick (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0081-0001 | IM-NY-0081-9000
Dunn, Christopher (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0081-0001 | IM-NY-0081-9000
Hodgson, Robert (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0081-0001 | IM-NY-0081-9000
Jain, Niji (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0081-0001 | IM-NY-0081-9000
Levine, Zoe (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0081-0001
Markowitz, Peter (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0081-0001 | IM-NY-0081-9000
Mathur, Suchita (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0081-0001
Nash, Lindsay (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0081-0001 | IM-NY-0081-9000
Norona, Mauricio Eduardo (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0081-9000
Pearce, Jacqueline (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0081-0001 | IM-NY-0081-9000
Robbins, Hannah (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0081-0001 | IM-NY-0081-9000
Steinberg, Johanna B. (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0081-0001 | IM-NY-0081-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Waterman, Brandon M. (New York) show/hide docs
IM-NY-0081-9000

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
view search results
page permalink

- top of page -