Filed Date: Dec. 9, 1987
Closed Date: 1990
Clearinghouse coding complete
On December 9, 1987, an alien and his citizen spouse brought suit in the District Court of Connecticut, challenging Section 5 of the Immigration and Marriage Fraud Amendments of 1986, 8 U.S.C. §§ 1154 (h) and 1255(e). The challenged section required that undocumented aliens who married U.S. citizens during their deportation proceedings must commit to a two-year separation, during which the undocumented alien must return to his or her country of origin. Plaintiffs asserted that the provision violated their right to equal protection and their substantive due process right to marriage.
Both parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. On August 2, 1989, the District Court (Judge Alan H. Nevas) granted defendants' motion and dismissed the action. The Court reasoned that the constitutionally protected right to marry did "not include a citizen spouse's interest in having the alien spouse remain in the United States." Azizi v. Thornburgh, 719 F. Supp, 91. (D. Conn. 1989) Plaintiffs appealed and the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal. Azizi v. Thornburgh, 908 F.2d 1130 (2nd Cir. 1990).
Summary Authors
Stephen Imm (8/20/2007)
Cardamone, Richard J. (New York)
Feinberg, Wilfred (New York)
Anastasi, William J. (Connecticut)
Bernal, David V. (District of Columbia)
Gerson, Stuart M. (District of Columbia)
Cardamone, Richard J. (New York)
Feinberg, Wilfred (New York)
Miner, Roger Jeffrey (New York)
Nevas, Alan Harris (Connecticut)
Last updated April 7, 2024, 3:14 a.m.
Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.State / Territory: Connecticut
Case Type(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: Dec. 9, 1987
Closing Date: 1990
Case Ongoing: No
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
An illegal alien married and his naturalized citizen wife, who were married during deportation proceedings
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: Unknown
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Attorney General of the United States , Federal
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Ex Parte Young (Federal) or Bivens
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Defendant
Nature of Relief:
Source of Relief:
Issues
Immigration/Border: