On May 18, 1998, three aliens from Mexico filed a class action suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, alleging that the U.S. Attorney General violated a number of federal immigration statutes. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief requiring the Attorney ...
read more >
On May 18, 1998, three aliens from Mexico filed a class action suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, alleging that the U.S. Attorney General violated a number of federal immigration statutes. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief requiring the Attorney General to "(a) allow them to remain in the United States, (b) issue work authorization and, when a visa is available to them (c) allow them to adjust status in the United States."
The government moved to dismiss on jurisdictional grounds and failure to state a claim.
On March 2, 1999, Magistrate Judge Paul Stickney issued a report which recommended that the defendant's motion to dismiss the case be granted, and that the plaintiff's complaint be dismissed. The District Court (Judge Jerry Buchmeyer) adopted the magistrate's recommendations and dismissed the case, stating that 8 U.S.C. § 1252(g) deprived the court of jurisdiction to review the case, and that plaintiffs had failed to state a legal basis for their claims. Plaintiffs appealed. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (Judge W. Eugene Davis) affirmed. Cardoso v. Reno, 216 F.3d 512 (5th Cir. 2000).
Erica Woodruff - 08/03/2007
compress summary
