University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse

Here are all the additions to the Clearinghouse collection -- cases, summaries, case studies, etc. -- over the past 90 days:


CASE ADDITIONS
October 18, 2020
Belle v. New York
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:19-cv-02673-VEC (S.D.N.Y.)
PN-NY-0051
This is a case about detaining people for warrant searches without reasonable suspicion. On March 25, 2019, two African-American and Latino men filed this putative class action lawsuit in the Southern District of New York against the City of New York under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiffs sought injunctive and declaratory relief, compensatory damages, and attorneys' fees. They claimed that the NYPD policy of detaining people for warrant searches without reasonable suspicion violated the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. They also claimed that the NYPD's policy was widespread and that the NYPD officials failed to properly train or supervise police officers regarding these searches. On January 3, 2020, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, which included adding five more plaintiffs and changing the class definition to use the specific term "NYPD record searches" instead of "warrant searches." As of October 18, 2020, the case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0051)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 18, 2020
G.T. v. Board of Education of Kanawha
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-00057 (S.D. W. Va.)
DR-WV-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (DR-WV-0001)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 17, 2020
La Union Del Pueblo Entero (LUPE) v. Trump
https://www.brennancenter.org/
Date: Sep. 14, 2020
By: Brennan Center for Justice
Latino groups filed a lawsuit against Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross challenging his directive to the Census Bureau to collect and produce citizenship data for state-level redistricting purposes. The plaintiffs argue that Secretary Ross’s directive violates the U.S. Constitution, the ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 16, 2020
The Detroit School Busing Case: Milliken v. Bradley and the Controversy over Desegregation
History of Education Quarterly
Date: May 2012
By: Deeann Grove
History of Education Quarterly Vol. 52, No. 2 (May 2012), pp. 282-285
While much remains to be understood about the desegregation of schools in the South, scholars are increasingly, and rightfully so, turning their attention to the desegregation and integration of northern schools. Joyce A. Baugh's decision to pursue this emerging line of inquiry comes from her ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
October 16, 2020
New York v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-05770 (S.D.N.Y.)
IM-NY-0080
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-NY-0080)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 15, 2020
Willis v. Seattle
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 2:17-cv-00077-RSM (W.D. Wash.)
PN-WA-0006
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PN-WA-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 15, 2020
Jones v. Stanford
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-01332 (E.D.N.Y.)
CJ-NY-0016
In the spring of 2020, several individuals under the supervision of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS), who were required to register under the Sexual Offender Registration Act (SORA), filed this lawsuit in the Eastern District of New York. The plaintiffs alleged that DOCCS's policies prohibiting SORA registrants under its supervision from accessing the internet and social media violated their First Amendment Rights. In Fall 2020, the Court issued a preliminary injunction against DOCCS's policies with respect to registrants whose offenses did not involve the internet. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (CJ-NY-0016)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 15, 2020
Dube v. Eagle USA Airfreight, Inc.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 01-900 (S.D. Tex.)
EE-TX-0110
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (EE-TX-0110)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 14, 2020
Legal Aid and DRNY File Class Action Lawsuit Against NYS Over Practice of Keeping New Yorkers with Mental Illness Incarcerated Past Their Release Dates
The Legal Aid Society
Date: Jan. 23, 2019
By: Redmond Haskins and Katrin Haldeman
The Legal Aid Society and Disability Rights New York filed a lawsuit today in the United States District Court for the Southern District on behalf of a class of New Yorkers with mental illness who have been held in prison because of a lack of community-based mental health housing programs. Some ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
October 14, 2020
McCadden v. Flint
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 2:18-cv-12377 (E.D. Mich.)
PN-MI-0012
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PN-MI-0012)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 14, 2020
Dobbey v. Weilding
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-01068 (N.D. Ill.)
PC-IL-0052
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PC-IL-0052)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 14, 2020
Wright v. Family Support Division
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 4:19-cv-00398-RLW (E.D. Mo.)
CJ-MO-0025
On March 4, 2019, two named plaintiffs filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri against the Missouri Department of Social Services Family Support Division and a number of other Missouri public officials challenging a Missouri law that allows the Family Support Division ("FSD") to suspend the driver's license of non-custodial parents that owe at least three months' worth of child support payments or at least $2,500 in child support payments, whichever is less. The plaintiffs claimed that FSD’s indefinite suspension of non-custodial parents’ driver’s licenses because of their inability to pay child support violates their constitutional rights under the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses. The two named plaintiffs filed the complaint on behalf of themselves and a class, defined as anyone who has had or will have his or her driver’s license suspended due to an inability to pay child support. The class sought declaratory and injunctive relief to enjoin the defendants from ordering and enforcing driver’s license suspensions, reinstate plaintiffs’ and class members’ driver’s licenses and grant reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs to the plaintiffs. On August 30, 2019, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The amended pleading added two new named defendants and supplemented the allegations of the original complaint. On May 1, 2019, the court partially granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim on all counts except the plaintiffs’ claim for violation of procedural due process. 2020 WL 2104766. The case remains ongoing.
View Case Detail (CJ-MO-0025)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 13, 2020
NAACP v. DeVos
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-01996 (D.D.C.)
ED-DC-0010
In July 2020, the NAACP, public school districts, and parents of children who attend public schools filed this complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The plaintiffs alleged that the Department of Education violated the U.S. Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act by exceeding its authority in creating a rule that stated that CARES Act funding must disbursed to non-public schools without regard to family income, residency, or low achievement. In September 2020, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs on the grounds that the Department of Education violated the APA and vacated the rule.
View Case Detail (ED-DC-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 12, 2020
Casa de Maryland v. Wolf
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 8:20-cv-02118-PX (D. Md.)
IM-MD-0017
In July 2020, five non-profit legal services organizations filed this lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on the grounds that two new rules unlawfully impaired the employment authorization document (EAD) application process by repealing the requirement that DHS resolve an EAD application within 30 days and delaying or eliminating some applicants’ access to work authorizations. The organizations sought injunctive relief and vacatur of the rules. On September 11, 2020, the court preliminarily enjoining DHS from enforcing a subset of the rules against members of the plaintiff organizations.
View Case Detail (IM-MD-0017)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 11, 2020
Amaro v. New Mexico
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:16-cv-00993 (D.N.M.)
PC-NM-0008
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PC-NM-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 11, 2020
Copeland v. Jones
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 4:15-cv-00452 (N.D. Fla.)
PC-FL-0024
In 2015, prisoners filed this class action in the U.S. District for the Northern District of Florida. The plaintiffs alleged that they were denied medical treatment for hernia and sought an injunction requiring a new health policy to provide surgery for hernia. In 2016, parties reached a settlement that required such policy as well as monetary damages to the plaintiffs. In 2019, the parties reached an agreement that in addition to the settlement, more complete and frequent reports would be provided and a delay of more than four months would be considered an "undue delay." As of October 11, 2020, this case is ongoing for monitoring and enforcement purposes.
View Case Detail (PC-FL-0024)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 10, 2020
Officer’s Claims Against State Attorney Who Read Letter Containing Racial Slurs Out Loud Barred by Prosecutorial Immunity
Wolters Kluwer
Date: Jul. 17, 2018
By: Kathleen Kapusta
Addressing interlocutory appeals that were part of a broader litigation alleging pervasive race discrimination and unlawful retaliation against three African-American municipal police officers, the Fourth Circuit, affirming in part the decision of the court below, found that prosecutorial immunity ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
October 10, 2020
Nielson v. Shinn
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-01182-GMS-JZB (D. Ariz.)
PC-AZ-0022
In 2020, current prisoners within the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry along with the Arizona State Conference of the NAACP, filed this class action complaint in the U.S. District Court of Arizona. The plaintiffs alleged that the agency was violating their rights under the 8th Amendment, 13th Amendment, and 14th Amendment by incarcerating them in private prisons instead of public facilities and refusing their application for transfer. In August, 2020, the defendants’ counsel filed a Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. In early fall, the plaintiffs’ counsel submitted their response for the defendants’ motion. The case remains open.
View Case Detail (PC-AZ-0022)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 10, 2020
Rosenblum v. John Does 1-10
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-01161 (D. Or.)
PN-OR-0006
This case was brought on July 17, 2020 by the State of Oregon through the Attorney General of Oregon, Ellen Rosenblum. It sued several federal agencies including the DHS, CBP, USMS, and Federal Protective Services, as well as ten unnamed and unidentified officers. The suit came as President Trump ordered federal law enforcement agencies to exert force in Portland, Oregon, following months of protests against racial inequality after the killing of George Floyd. The complaint alleged that the federal agencies were detaining people off the streets without warrants, putting them into unmarked vans, and taking them to the courthouse without telling them the crime for which they were detained. The plaintiff sought declaratory and injunctive relief, prohibiting the agencies from arresting people without warrants, mandating that the agents identify themselves and the agencies they work for, and explaining to all detainees the crime for which they would be arrested. The State of Oregon sought a temporary restraining order, but the Court denied it on July 24 because the State lacked standing to bring the lawsuit. 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.
View Case Detail (PN-OR-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 10, 2020
Jones v. Wolf
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-00361 (W.D.N.Y.)
IM-NY-0077
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-NY-0077)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 10, 2020
Subramanya v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-03707 (S.D. Ohio)
IM-OH-0005
In 2020, immigrants who had received approval for their Applications for Work Authorization but who had not yet received Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) from United States Citizenship and Immigration Services filed this class action complaint in the U.S. Southern District Court of Ohio Eastern Division. The plaintiffs alleged that the agency was intentionally delaying or stopping printing the documents altogether, making it impossible for the putative class members to work. This was in violation of their substantive Due Process rights under the 5th Amendment and of the Administrative Procedure Act. In August 2020, the parties reached a settlement that required USCIS to create and update a list of putative class members and to produce and mail EADs to the pertinent class members. The case remains open.
View Case Detail (IM-OH-0005)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 9, 2020
Center for Popular Democracy Action v. Bureau of the Census
Brennan Center
Date: Apr. 21, 2020
By: Brennan Center
The Center for Popular Democracy Action and the City of Newburgh, New York sued the Census Bureau, contending that the Bureau’s preparations for the 2020 Census were deficient and would lead to a dramatic undercount of communities of color.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 9, 2020
CLC v. DOJ (Census FOIA)
Campaign Legal Center
Date: Jul. 30, 2018
By: Campaign Legal Center
CLC filed suit against the Department of Justice (DOJ) for its failure to produce any documents related to its December 2017 request to the Department of Commerce to add a citizenship question in the upcoming 2020 U.S. Census.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 9, 2020
California v. Trump
Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law
Date: Jul. 31, 2020
By: Brennan Center for Justice
The State of California – along with several California cities and the Los Angeles Unified School District - are challenging President Trump’s attempt to exclude undocumented immigrants from the state-population totals that are produced by the 2020 Census and used for apportioning seats in the ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 9, 2020
FNU Tanzin v. Tanvir
Oyez
Date: Oct. 6, 2020
By: Oyez
The plaintiffs, Muslim men born outside of the U.S. but living lawfully inside the country, allege that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) placed their names on the national “No Fly List,” despite posing no threat to aviation, in retaliation for their refusal to become FBI informants ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 9, 2020
Tanzin v. Tanvir
SCOTUSblog
Date: Oct. 6, 2020
By: SCOTUSblog
Issue: Whether the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb, permits suits seeking money damages against individual federal employees.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 9, 2020
Tanvir v. Tanzin (formerly Tanvir v. Holder and Tanvir v. Lynch)
Center for Constitutional Rights
Date: Oct. 6, 2020
By: Center for Constitutional Rights
Tanvir v. Lynch (formerly Tanvir v. Holder) is a federal lawsuit filed against the FBI, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Homeland Security that challenges the FBI’s abuse of the No-Fly List to coerce law-abiding American Muslims into spying on their religious communities. The ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
October 9, 2020
Meade v. Bonin
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-01455-CJB-DMD (E.D. La.)
CJ-LA-0012
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (CJ-LA-0012)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 9, 2020
Harrison v. Spencer
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-00641 (E.D. Va.)
EE-VA-0142
In 2018, an Army Reservist and lawyer filed this complaint for injunctive relief in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia after allegedly being refused a commission as a Judge Advocate General officer in the D.C. National Guard. The plaintiff challenged Department of Defense policies preventing HIV positive service members from being hired or promoted and discharging present service members with HIV, alleging violations of his Fifth Amendment rights. After several years of pretrial litigation, the case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (EE-VA-0142)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 9, 2020
Tanvir v. Holder
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-06951-RA (S.D.N.Y.)
NS-NY-0007
The plaintiffs, four American Muslim men that have been denied boarding on flights originating in or destined for the U.S. because of their alleged inclusion on the No Fly List of the federal government, filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The plaintiffs specifically alleged that their inclusion on the No Fly List is because they refused to forfeit their constitutional rights by serving as FBI informants. The Second Circuit held that RFRA permits individual capacity suits against government officers for money damages. The Supreme Court then granted cert, and oral argument was held on October 6, 2020. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (NS-NY-0007)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 9, 2020
Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates (COPAA) v. DeVos
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-02310-GLR (D. Md.)
ED-MD-0005
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (ED-MD-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 9, 2020
R. v. Connecticut State Board of Education
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 3:16-cv-01197 (D. Conn.)
ED-CT-0008
In July 2016, a class of individuals with disabilities under the age of 21 sued the Connecticut State Board of Education in the District of Connecticut under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Represented by Disability Rights Connecticut, the class sought declaratory and injunctive relief as well as compensatory damages and attorney’s fees. The class alleged that the Board violated their right to free and appropriate public education (FAPE) guaranteed under the IDEA by terminating their special education services once they turned 21 years old. The plaintiff class contended that they were entitled to FAPE until age 22. On June 10, 2019, the court issued a ruling that granted the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgement and denied the Board’s cross-motion. On July 10, 2020, the court enjoined the termination of FAPE to members of the class prior to them turning 22 years of age. The Board appealed on July 10, 2020 and on August 4, 2020, the court granted the Board’s motion to stay the plaintiffs' motion for attorney's fees pending appeal. The appeal is ongoing.
View Case Detail (ED-CT-0008)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 8, 2020
Houston, TX: Probable Cause
Civil Rights Corps
Date: Dec. 30, 2018
By: Civil Rights Corps
Civil Rights Corps filed two class-action lawsuits against the City of Houston and Harris County, Texas, for illegally detaining thousands of people every year for extended time periods after arrest in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The first lawsuit resulted in a federal injunction reforming ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
October 8, 2020
Scholl v. Mnuchin
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 4:20-cv-05309-PJH (N.D. Cal.)
PB-CA-0058
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PB-CA-0058)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 8, 2020
Wise v. Portland
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-01193 (D. Or.)
PN-OR-0007
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PN-OR-0007)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 8, 2020
A.B. v. Morgan
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-00846-RJL (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0089
The plaintiffs, a group of mothers and children from Honduras, Ecuador, and Mexico seeking asylum in the United States, were granted preliminary injunctive relieve from asylum determinations made by Border Patrol Agents. The District Court for the District of Columbia found that due to limited training given to these agents, these determinations likely violate the Immigration and Nationality Act and issued the preliminary injunction barring their removal. The case awaits judgement on the merits.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0089)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 7, 2020
Hope v. Doll
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-00562 (M.D. Pa.)
IM-PA-0017
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-PA-0017)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 7, 2020
Thakker v. Doll
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-00480 (M.D. Pa.)
IM-PA-0016
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-PA-0016)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 6, 2020
A.D. v. Washburn
Case Category: Child Welfare
Trial Docket: 2:15-cv-01259-NVW (D. Ariz.)
CW-AZ-0003
On July 6, 2015, an attorney representing Indian children as a “next friend” and foster parents of American Indian children filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. The plaintiffs alleged that certain provisions of the Indian Child Welfare Act were unconstitutional because they discriminate against Indian children and non-Indian foster, preadoptive and prospective adoptive parents on the basis of race. The plaintiffs also alleged that the Bureau of Indian Affairs Guidelines that accompany the Act were unlawful agency action. On March 16, 2017, the District Court dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims for lack of standing because the plaintiffs did not allege an injury. The plaintiffs appealed to the Ninth Circuit, but the Court dismissed the case for mootness because the children involved in the case were adopted before the appeal could be heard. The Supreme Court declined to hear the case.
View Case Detail (CW-AZ-0003)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 5, 2020
McCadden v. City of Flint
aclu.org
Date: Jun. 5, 2020
By: American Civil Liberties Union
The ACLU and the ACLU of Michigan filed a lawsuit against the Flint Police Department and the Flint Chamber of Commerce on behalf of Cameron McCadden, a child with disabilities who was handcuffed by a school resource officer (SRO) when he was seven years old. Cameron, who is black, has Attention ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 5, 2020
Legal Attacks Mount on Crowded Houston Jails
Courthouse News Service
Date: Dec. 29, 2016
By: Cameron Langford
In the latest of three federal class actions challenging a post-arrest regime that effectively warehouses poor people in Texas’s most crowded jail, two men claim Harris County unconstitutionally jailed them with “unsworn” arrest reports.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 5, 2020
The United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit
Youtube.com
Date: Sep. 29, 2020
By: The United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit
Case #: 20-CV-2023 COMMON CAUSE, et. al. P: Gregory L. Diskant (23 min. argument) vs.
DONALD J. TRUMP, et. al. (in his official capacity as President of the United States
D: Sopan Joshi (30 min. argument)

Amicus: U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Amicus: Douglas N. Letter (7 ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
October 5, 2020
Lomas v. Harris County
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 4:16-cv-03745 (S.D. Tex.)
CJ-TX-0020
In 2016, two individuals arrested without warrants filed this putative class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas against Harris County. Represented by the Civil Rights Corps and the Texas Fair Defense Project, the plaintiffs sought declaratory judgment, an injunction, and attorneys' fees. They claimed that keeping people in custody after a warrantless arrest without providing a determination of probable cause based on sworn statements violated the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. Similarly, also claimed that keeping people in custody after a warrantless misdemeanor arrest without offering bond when eligible for release violated the Texas Criminal Procedure Code. On November 1, 2017, the parties settled. The District Attorney agreed to change the process of presenting probable cause statements for warrantless arrests so that an officer now swears to the facts inputted into the District Attorney Intake System (DIMS). The defendants paid the plaintiffs $75,000 in attorneys' fees, but did not admit liability or that they engaged in the practices alleged by the plaintiffs. The court ordered for the settlement to be monitored for three years.
View Case Detail (CJ-TX-0020)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 3, 2020
Morgan v. U.S. Soccer Federation
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:19-cv-01717 (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0363
The Women's National Soccer Team alleged that the United States Soccer Federation discriminated against them in terms of pay and working conditions in violation of the Equal Pay Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The court denied the Equal Pay Act claim because the team failed to provide sufficient evidence for gender-based unequal pay. The Title VII claim is moving forward however on the premise of unequal working conditions and is scheduled for a jury trial on January 26, 2021. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (EE-CA-0363)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 2, 2020
Doe v. BHC Fairfax Hospital, Inc.
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 2:19-cv-00635-TSZ (W.D. Wash.)
DR-WA-0004
In April 2019, former mental health patients at Fairfax Behavioral Medicine in Washington State sued Fairfax under Title III of the Americans with Disability Act and state statues. The plaintiffs alleged that Fairfax has an indiscriminate policy of requiring all adult and teen patients to submit to random, video-recorded strip and cavity searches. The plaintiffs sought class certification on behalf of all persons admitted to Fairfax between April 30, 2016 and the date of class certification, but certification was denied in August 2020. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (DR-WA-0004)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 2, 2020
Mohrbacher v. Alameda County Sheriffs Office
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-00050 (N.D. Cal.)
JC-CA-0142
On January 4, 2018, six women prisoners filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California alleging systematic, misogynistic mistreatment of women prisoners at the Alameda County Jail in Santa Rita, California. The plaintiffs sued Alameda County and the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office under 42 U.S.C. §1983 for violations of their rights under the U.S. Constitution and state law. On April 12, 2018, the plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint. The plaintiffs elaborated on the allegations in the original complaint of the mistreatment against pregnant women prisoners and discrimination against women prisoners in general. The second amended complaint also added additional causes of action under California state law and identified additional named defendants beyond the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office and individuals employed therein, including the California Forensic Medical Group, retained to provide medical services to prisoners and Aramark Correctional Services, a for-profit food services provider at the Jail. The plaintiffs requested that the court certify a plaintiff class of women prisoners and the subclass of pregnant women prisoners, and that the court issue emergency remedy, by decree, to ensure that the women prisoners receive the medical care and other accommodations they needed to be safe while in custody at the Alameda County Jail. Finally, in addition to the injunctive relief and compensatory and punitive damages requested in the original complaint, the plaintiffs requested that the court affirmatively direct the defendants to fully comply with all state statutes and regulations regarding medical treatment, nutrition, activities, and personal hygiene for women prisoners. The parties began engaging in settlement negotiations and entered an agreement in principle on May 14, 2018. On May 7, 2019, one named plaintiff moved to relate the case to Gonzalez v. Ahern. Though opposed by the defendants, on May 15, 2020, the court related this case to Gonzalez v. Ahern. For further information, refer to the Clearinghouse page, available at this link.
View Case Detail (JC-CA-0142)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 2, 2020
New York Immigration Coalition v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-05781 (S.D.N.Y.)
IM-NY-0079
In July 2020, several immigration advocacy and nonprofit organizations filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The plaintiffs claimed that by excluding “undocumented immigrants from: (a) the tabulation of the total population of the states; (b) the calculation and statement of the whole number of persons in each state; and (c) the calculation and statement of the apportionment of the House of Representatives among the states” the federal government were violating the Enumeration and Apportionment clauses of the United States Constitution, Equal Protection under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, the Separation of Powers, the Census Act, and. In August 2020, this case was consolidated with State of New York v. Trump. For additional information, on this case, please see State of New York v. Trump.
View Case Detail (IM-NY-0079)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 1, 2020
League of Women Voters Of Ohio v. Larose
The Ohio State University College of Law
Date: May 26, 2020
By: The Ohio State University College of Law
Plaintiffs challenge the standards for the delayed primary created by the enactment of House Bill 197 (“H.B. 197”), including the refusal to extend the voter registration deadline, which passed on February 18, to at most thirty days prior to April 28; the imposition of a multi-step, multi- ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
October 1, 2020
Doe v. Massachusetts Department of Corrections
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-12255 (D. Mass.)
PC-MA-0052
The plaintiff, a trans woman housed in a men's prison in Massachusetts, sued the Department of Correction (DOC) and several administrators in the department for mistreatment while in custody on account of her gender identity and presentation. She was represented by GLAD and brought the suit in the District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The complaint requested injunctive relief and attorney's fees. The judge granted a preliminary injunction regarding how prison staff were required to treat and accommodate the plaintiff while housed in the men's facility. After the plaintiff's transfer to a women's facility in 2018 and release in 2019, the judge dismissed the case as moot and awarded attorneys' fees to the plaintiff.
View Case Detail (PC-MA-0052)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 30, 2020
Justice Department Seeks to Intervene in Lawsuit Alleging Race Discrimination and Retaliation by Pocomoke City, Maryland, the Worcester County Sheriff and the State Of Maryland
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Date: Oct. 19, 2016
By: U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
The United States' complaint in intervention alleges that the Worcester County Sheriff and the state of Maryland subjected former Pocomoke City Police Officer Franklin Savage to a racially-hostile work environment while he was assigned to a joint task force operated by the sheriff's office ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 30, 2020
Savage v. Pocomoke City
ACLU Maryland
Date: 2020
By: ACLU Maryland
The lawsuit alleges numerous causes of action on behalf of the plaintiffs due to the race-based discrimination and retaliation they endured, which are "clearly prohibited by federal and state laws as well as [the] Constitution." The asserted causes of action include those involving the First and ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 30, 2020
Harrison v. Esper (formerly v. Shanahan)
https://www.lambdalegal.org/
Date: Sep. 14, 2018
By: Lambda Legal
Lambda Legal, Modern Military Association of America (MMAA), with partner law firm Winston & Strawn, filed a lawsuit on behalf of a sergeant in the D.C. Army National Guard who was denied the opportunity to serve as an officer and faces possible discharge from the United States armed services ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
September 30, 2020
Savage v. Pocomoke City
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:16-cv-00201-JFM (D. Md.)
EE-MD-0153
In 2016, three Pocomoke City, Maryland police officers filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The plaintiffs alleged that they suffered racial discrimination and retaliation by their employer in violation of their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In 2019, two of the officers reached a partial settlement with Pocomoke City requiring adoption of anti-discrimination policies and procedures by the police department and awarding monetary damages to the officers. As of September 30, 2020, the case is still ongoing pending a final settlement.
View Case Detail (EE-MD-0153)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 30, 2020
Huntsman v. Southwest Airlines
Case Category: Public Accomm./Contracting
Trial Docket: 3:17-cv-03972 (N.D. Cal.)
PA-CA-0005
In 2017, current and former pilots of Southwest Airlines filed a class action complaint against their employer in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. They alleged that Southwest failed to provide the retirement contributions and sick leave for military duty leaves of absence that are mandated by the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Act. In 2018, the parties reached a settlement agreement whereby Southwest restored current employees sick leave and paid $5.8 million to cover retirement contributions, compensation for and restoration of sick leave, and attorneys’ fees. Under the settlement, the court retained jurisdiction for three years.
View Case Detail (PA-CA-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 30, 2020
League of Women Voters of Ohio v. LaRose
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-01638 (S.D. Ohio)
VR-OH-0084
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (VR-OH-0084)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 29, 2020
New York v. Trump
Case Category: Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-02340 (D.D.C.)
PR-DC-0018
In June and July 2020, the U.S. Postal service implemented significant Postal Policy Changes. The States of New York, Hawaii, and New Jersey; the City of New York; and the City and County of San Francisco filed this lawsuit the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The plaintiffs sued Donald J. Trump, in his official capacity as President of the United States; Louis DeJoy, in his official capacity as Postmaster General; and the U.S. Postal Service under the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act, the Postal Reorganization Act, and the Elections Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief. They claimed that the agency acted beyond its authority and in violation of the Elections Clause when implementing the Postal Policy Changes, causing nationwide delays in First-Class mail and impeding efforts by states and localities to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 and ensure safe alternatives to in-person voting. In September 2020, The D.D.C. granted the motion for preliminary injunction against the government defendants. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PR-DC-0018)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 29, 2020
National Association of the Deaf v. Trump
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-02107 (D.D.C.)
DR-DC-0008
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (DR-DC-0008)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 28, 2020
Memorandum on Excluding Illegal Aliens From the Apportionment Base Following the 2020 Census
WhiteHouse.org
Date: Jul. 21, 2020
By: Donald J Trump
Excluding Illegal Aliens From the Apportionment Base Following the 2020 Census.*
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
September 28, 2020
California v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-05169-EMC (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0169
In 2020, the State of California, the City of Los Angeles, the City of Long Beach, the City of Oakland, and the Los Angeles Unified School District filed this lawsuit in the Northern District of California. The plaintiffs alleged that President Trump's Memorandum violated the constitutional mandates for the census (actual enumeration and apportionment) and separation of powers, as well as violating the Census Act and the Administrative Procedure Act. The case is ongoing as of September 28, 2020.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0169)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 28, 2020
Hudson v. Montgomery County
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-01487-JDW (E.D. Pa.)
FA-PA-0017
On March 17th, 2020 a former chief public defender of Montgomery County filed a suit against the county for wrongful retaliation and wrongful discharge. She alleged that she was fired because she directed her office to file an amicus brief critical of the County's money bail system. She claimed that this violated her rights protected by the First Amendment and the common law of Pennsylvania. Montgomery County moved to dismiss the case, and the judge has not yet ruled on the motion.
View Case Detail (FA-PA-0017)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 28, 2020
Tully v. Okeson
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-01271 (S.D. Ind.)
VR-IN-0028
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (VR-IN-0028)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 28, 2020
DCCC v. Ziriax
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 4:20-cv-00211 (N.D. Okla.)
VR-OK-0020
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (VR-OK-0020)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 27, 2020
Western Native Voice v. Stapleton
https://www.aclu.org/
Date: Sep. 25, 2020
By: American Civil Liberties Union
The American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Montana, and Native American Rights Fund are challenging a Montana law that severely restricts Native Americans’ access to the ballot.*
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
September 27, 2020
Albert v. Global TelLink Corp.
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 8:20-cv-01936-PWG (D. Md.)
PC-MD-0015
On June 29, 2020, four individuals who paid $9.99 or $14.99 to accept collect calls from three prison phone providersof prisoners filed this class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. The plaintiffs alleged that three providers of inmate calling services (Global Tel*Link, Securus Technologies, and 3CI) colluded to fix the price of these one-time collect calls and lied about prices in violation of federal antitrust laws and RICO. The defendants claimed that their high prices were due to "transaction fees," but the plaintiffs alleged the transaction fees were much lower and the defendatns were pocketing the difference. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PC-MD-0015)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 27, 2020
Roman v. Wolf
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 5:20-cv-00768-TJH-PVC (C.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0161
Immigration detainees in the Adelanto Detention Center filed a class action to secure release from the detention center and improvement of sanitation and virus-prevention methods in light of COVID-19. The class was provisionally certified and a preliminary injunction was entered on April 23, requiring the defendants to release enough detainees so that the remaining detainees could maintain 6 feet of social distancing at all times, and to provide cleaning supplies and sanitization of common areas.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0161)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 26, 2020
Hendrix v. Chipotle Mexican Grill Incorporated
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-01595 (D. Ariz.)
EE-AZ-0137
In 2020, the plaintiff filed this lawsuit against her employer, Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant discriminated against her due to her sex by refusing to allow her to take a break during her shift to pump breastmilk. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (EE-AZ-0137)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 26, 2020
Haitian-Americans United v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-11421-DPW (D. Mass.)
IM-MA-0023
On July 27, 2020, Haitian-Americans United, Inc., Brazilian Worker Center, Chelsea Collaborative, Inc. and Centro Presente filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District Of Massachusetts. The plaintiffs alleged that the Presidential Memorandum titled “Excluding Illegal Aliens from the Apportionment Base Following the 2020 Census” is unconstitutional and that any compliance violates §§ 706(2) of the APA because it is contrary to constitutional power, right, privilege, or immunity and in excess of statutory jurisdiction and authority, and without observance of procedure required by law. The case has been approved for a three-judge court and is awaiting the defendants' answer.
View Case Detail (IM-MA-0023)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 26, 2020
Williamson v. Maciol
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 9:20-cv-00537 (N.D.N.Y.)
JC-NY-0082
On May 12, 2020, three female general custody prisoners filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York on behalf of themselves and all similarly situated individuals. The plaintiffs sued the Oneida County Sheriff and the Chief Deputy of the Oneida County Jail under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and under Article I § 11 of the New York State Constitution. Represented by the Legal Services of Central New York, the plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent the Jail from denying female general custody prisoners equal access to the housing and program benefits that male general custody prisoners receive.
View Case Detail (JC-NY-0082)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 25, 2020
Common Cause v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-02023 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0084
On July 21 2020, President Trump issued a memorandum titled “Excluding Illegal Aliens From the Apportionment Base Following the 2020 Census.” Two days later, on July 23, the nonprofit Common Cause, along with cities, citizens and organizations from across America, filed a complaint for declaratory judgement and injunctive relief against implementation of the memorandum, which describes President Trump’s intent to use the data gathered in the 2020 census to exclude undocumented immigrants from being counted when apportioning seats in the US House of Representative and votes in the Electoral College. The plaintiffs claimed that the memorandum violated Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution and the Equal Protection Clause as guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. The plaintiffs filed a motion for partial summary judgment and the defendants filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction but as of now, the case is still pending.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0084)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 25, 2020
Angell v. Oakland
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 3:13-cv-00190 (N.D. Cal.)
PN-CA-0048
This is a case about mass arrest and detention related to the “Occupy Oakland” march on January 28, 2012. On January 14, 2013, persons who had been arrested filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The plaintiffs sued the City of Oakland and the Alameda County under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Represented by private counsel, the plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, monetary damages, and the destruction of records pertaining to the arrest. They claimed that they had been subject to 14th amendment violations, false arrest and imprisonment, violation of state law, and negligence during the course of their arrest and detention. Plaintiffs’ arrest records pertaining to this event were sealed and destroyed as part of a $1.36 million settlement.
View Case Detail (PN-CA-0048)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 25, 2020
Amador v. Mnuchin
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-01102 (D. Md.)
PB-MD-0009
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PB-MD-0009)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 24, 2020
FISA Court Matters relating to disclosure of Carter Page surveillance records: Four FISC cases [FISC Misc. 18-01, Misc. 18-02, Misc. 18-03, and Misc. 19-01]
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: Misc. 18-01 (FISC)
NS-DC-0126
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0126)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 24, 2020
In re Opinions and Orders of this Court Containing Novel or Significant Interpretations of Law
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: Misc. 16-01 (FISC)
NS-DC-0117
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Media Freedom and Information Access of Yale Law School filed this motion in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) to unseal the court's orders and opinions containing "novel or significant interpretations of law" issued between September 11, 2001, and the passage of the USA FREEDOM Act on June 2, 2015. Judge Boasberg dismissed this case on September 15, 2020 for a lack of jurisdiction.
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0117)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 24, 2020
Boston Alliance of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Youth (BAGLY) v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-11297 (D. Mass.)
PB-MA-0013
This case is about a regulation promulgated by the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) affecting protections against discrimination in healthcare on the basis of sex, which were created by the Affordable Care Act. In 2010, Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to ...
View Case Detail (PB-MA-0013)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 24, 2020
EEOC v. Walmart
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 6:20-cv-00163 (E.D. Ky.)
EE-KY-0037
On August 3, 2020, after an attempt to reach a settlement through a voluntary pre-litigation process, the EEOC brought a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky against Walmart alleging sex discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The complaint alleges that since 2010, in Walmart grocery distribution centers nationwide, Walmart used a physical abilities test in hiring for grocery orderfillers. Because women tended to receive less than competitive scores on the physical abilities test, Walmart’s use of this physical abilities test disparately and negatively affected women in the hiring process for grocery orderfillers. The EEOC asked the court for: (a) a permanent injunction preventing Walmart from using physical abilities tests to hire for grocery orderfiller positions; (b) a permanent injunction against any hiring practices, such as employment tests, that have a disparate and discriminatory impact on women; (c) an order requiring Walmart to institute new training, policies and programs that provide equal employment opportunities based on sex and that ensure that its operations are free from employment practices that discriminate on women based on sex; (d) an order requiring Walmart to compensate the plaintiffs to eradicate the effects of the discriminatory employment practices; (e) an order granting further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper; and (f) an order awarding EEOC costs for the lawsuit. By the time that the lawsuit was filed, the parties had already agreed on terms of a settlement. On August 3, 2020 the parties filed a joint motion for entry of a consent decree and on September 9, 2020, Judge Karen Caldwell granted the motion and approved the consent decree. All of the EEOC’s requests except for the awarding of costs to EEOC were granted by the court. The decree ordered Walmart to pay $20,000,000.00 into a Qualified Settlement Fund as part of the resolution, to be distributed to eligible claimants at the sole discretion of the EEOC. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky retains jurisdiction over the matter for two years, through September 9, 2022. The case remains ongoing.
View Case Detail (EE-KY-0037)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 24, 2020
In re Motion of ProPublica, Inc. for the Release of Court Records [FISC Docket Misc. 13-09]
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: Misc. 13-09 (FISC)
NS-DC-0027
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0027)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 24, 2020
American Humanist Association v. Perry
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 5:15-ct-03053 (E.D.N.C.)
PC-NC-0021
This case is about the refusal of North Carolina's Department of Public Safety (DPS) to recognize Humanism as a faith group within the North Carolina state prison system. On February 2, 2015, an inmate in a North Carolina prison and the American Humanist Association filed this lawsuit in the Eastern District of North Carolina against officers of the North Carolina Department of Public Safety that are involved in policy decisions related to recognition of faith groups in state prison under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. They alleged violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment, and on March 29, 2018, Judge Terrence W. Boyle granted the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and denied the defendants' motion. He entered a permanent injunction ordering DPS to recognize Humanism as a faith group and to permit a Humanist study group to meet within North Carolina state prisons on the same terms as other faiths are allowed and entered declaratory judgment. The court also awarded nominal damages and attorneys' fees and costs. Since the entering of the permanent injunction, there has been no activity in this case. The permanent injunction remains in effect.
View Case Detail (PC-NC-0021)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 23, 2020
New York v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-05583 (S.D.N.Y.)
PB-NY-0038
In July 2020, twenty-two states and the District of Columbia (States) filed this lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on the grounds that the June 19, 2020 rule within the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act arbitrarily and unlawfully denied health care rights guaranteed under Section 1557 of the Act. The States alleged the 2020 rule allowed for discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation, excluded health insurance from protected programs, removed notification of rights to individuals with limited English proficiency, and created a broad religious exemption. The States sought vacatur of the rule, declaratory and injunctive relief, and attorneys’ fees. The court ordered HHS to provide the relevant administrative record by October 16, 2020 and scheduled a telephone conference for October 29, 2020. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PB-NY-0038)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 21, 2020
Whitman-Walker Clinic v. HHS
Lambda Legal
Date: 07/15/2020
By: Lambda Legal
Lambda Legal and Steptoe & Johnson LLP filed a lawsuit challenging the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) published rule that purports to carve out LGBTQ people and other vulnerable populations from the protections of Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, which prohibits ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
September 21, 2020
Whitman-Walker Health v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-01630 (D.D.C.)
PB-DC-0013
In June 2020, the Trump Administration's Department of Health and Human Services issued a revised regulation under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act that limited protections for discrimination against LGBTQ individuals. A group of LGBTQ-focused private healthcare providers, organizations providing community services, health professional associations, and individual providers filed this lawsuit in the District Court for the District of Columbia. The plaintiffs alleged that the revised rule violated the Administrative Procedure Act, First Amendment, and the Fifth Amendment. On September 2, the court found that the plaintiffs had standing for most of their claims, and enjoined the Administration from implementing two provisions: (1) the 2020 Rule's elimination of "sex stereotyping" from the 2016 Rule's definition of "discrimination on the basis of sex" and (2) the 2020 Rule's use of Title IX's exemption of certain religious organizations from the statute’s nondiscrimination mandate. It denied relief for the 2020 Rule's elimination of the 2016 Rule’s prohibition on categorical coverage exclusions for gender-affirming care, repeal of the 2020 Rule's notice requirements, and alleged violation of Section 1554, in addition to the plaintiffs' constitutional claims. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PB-DC-0013)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 19, 2020
Occupy Oakland J28 Class Action Settlement
J28
Date: Apr. 15, 2015
By: J28
This lawsuit is about the mass arrest in Oakland, California, on January 28, 2012, when the Oakland Police Department and several other law enforcement agencies arrested approximately 360 people in front of the YMCA at 2350 Broadway in downtown Oakland. Most of the arrestees had been marching in a ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 19, 2020
Common Cause v. Trump
Common Cause
Date: Jul. 23, 2020
By: Common Cause
On July 21, 2020, President Donald Trump issued a memo describing his administration’s intent to implement a discriminatory and unconstitutional policy regarding the census. This memo directed the Secretary of Commerce to provide the President with the information necessary to exclude ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 19, 2020
Common Cause v. Trump
Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law
Date: Aug. 27, 2020
By: Brennan Center for Justice
Common Cause et al., are challenging President Trump’s attempt to exclude undocumented immigrants from the state-population totals that are produced by the 2020 Census and used for apportioning seats in the U.S. House of Representatives and votes in the Electoral College. This case is pending in ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
September 19, 2020
Uniformed Fire Officers Association v. DeBlasio
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-05441 (S.D.N.Y.)
PN-NY-0050
This lawsuit, filed in July of 2020, came as a result of the New York state legislature's decision to repeal CVR § 50-a, a law that protected officers from having their disciplinary records disclosed to the public. When the law was repealed, New York City issued proclamations to disclose those records to the public, after which several emergency services associations sued the city and senior level administrators. They argued that disclosure of these records would represent violations of the Fourteenth Amendment, the New York State Constitution, New York statutory law, and breach of contract. The case was originally filed in state court, but the defendants removed it to the U.S. District for the Southern District of New York. The suit was almost immediately contentious, with a debate about whether to even have discovery and, if so, how far it should go, riddled with complaints that the defendants were not operating quickly enough. Several outside groups filed amicus briefs and one group, Communities United for Police Reform, moved to intervene as a defendant. They were one of the central groups pushing for the demise of 50-a. The 2nd Circuit decided that the NYCLU was properly excluded from the TRO by late August. Around the same time, the District Court partially granted the plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction, but writing that it would only forbid disclosure of the "schedule A" command discipline violations by the NYPD and the CCRB. Also in late August, the District Court granted Communities United for Police Reform's (CUPR's) motion to intervene permissively, but denied their motion to intervene of right. Following this holding, the original defendants and CUPR both filed motions to dismiss in early September. The case is ongoing as of September 19, 2020.
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0050)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 19, 2020
Campaign Legal Center v. DOJ
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-01771 (D.D.C.)
PB-DC-0012
In 2018, the Campaign Legal Center filed this lawsuit to compel the Department of Justice to comply with a Freedom of Information Act request by produce documents pertaining to the inclusion of a citizenship question on the 2020 United States census. In 2020, summary judgment was granted for the plaintiff. The government has since appealed.
View Case Detail (PB-DC-0012)


CASE STUDIES
September 18, 2020
"Policing the Police: The Impact of "Pattern-or-Practice" Investigations on Crime"
https://www.nber.org/papers/w27324
Date: June 2020
By: Tanaya Devi, Roland G. Fryer Jr (Harvard Faculty)
This paper provides the first empirical examination of the impact of federal and state "Pattern-or Practice" investigations on crime and policing. For investigations that were not preceded by "viral" incidents of deadly force, investigations, on average, led to a statistically significant reduction ...
View Case Study Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
September 18, 2020
Washington v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-01105 (W.D. Wash.)
PB-WA-0008
The state of Washington filed this suit on June 19th, 2020 against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services seeking to vacate three sections of a 2020 rule promulgated under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The disputed sections removed “sexual orientation, sex stereotyping, and gender identity” from the definition of sex discrimination, added a religious exemption, and redefined of the scope of covered entities. Washington filed a motion for a preliminary injunction. It was denied. The court also found that Washington lacked standing to sue. As a result, Washington voluntarily dismissed its case.
View Case Detail (PB-WA-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 18, 2020
Slusher v. City of Napa
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 4:15-cv-02394 (N.D. Cal.)
PN-CA-0047
In 2014, the father and grandparents of a deceased child filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, [seeking damages and injunctive relief]. The plaintiffs alleged that, by their failure to report and investigate, defendants, in part, caused the death of the three year-old child. In 2018, the parties came to a settlement that included both policy changes and monetary damages.
View Case Detail (PN-CA-0047)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 18, 2020
Franklin v. Whole Foods
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-04935 (S.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0296
The plaintiff was denied employment by Whole Foods due to prior criminal history, despite three New York/New York City statues that protect applicants with criminal histories. The plaintiff brought a class action suit and has until September 25, 2020 to file an amended complaint in response to Whole Food's motion to dismiss.
View Case Detail (EE-NY-0296)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 17, 2020
In re Accuracy Concerns Regarding FBI Matters Submitted to the FISC; In re Carter W. Page, a U.S. Person [FISA Dockets Misc. 19-02, 16-1182]
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: Misc. 19-02 (FISC)
NS-DC-0138
In response to late 2019 disclosures showing "inaccuracies and omissions" in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant applications against Trump 2016 campaign official Carter Page, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) released a series of orders asking the FBI to reform its FISA warrant application process and training on FISA warrants. The government is working to comply with these orders, though the FISC granted several extensions for reporting requirements in 2020 due to COVID-19 concerns.
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0138)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 17, 2020
Gilder v. Sallie Mae Bank
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-00924 (D. Del.)
EE-DE-0041
In 2020, an African-American individual who had his job offer from Sallie Mae Bank rescinded filed this putative class-action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. The plaintiff alleged that Sallie Mae Bank's policy and practice of rescinding or terminating employment based on background history is in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (EE-DE-0041)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 17, 2020
P.J.E.S v. Wolf
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-02245 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0087
In August 2020, a persecuted minor seeking asylum in the United States who was instead detained filed this class action complaint in the D.C. District Court. The plaintiff alleges that the new regulations interpreting 42 U.S.C. § 265 violate protections of the Immigration and Nationality Act and the TVPRA, and the plaintiff seeks injunctive and declaratory relief for all members of the class. The case currently awaits a ruling on class certification and a motion for a preliminary injunction.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0087)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 17, 2020
Signature Sothbeys International Realty, Inc. v. Whitmer
Case Category: Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-00360 (W.D. Mich.)
PR-MI-0003
On April 28, 2020, several Michigan businesses that were required to close during the outbreak of COVID-19 filed this suit against Governor Whitmer in the U.S. District Court for the District of Western Michigan. Plaintiffs challenged Michigan's executive orders, which required businesses deemed non-critical to close, alleging that the orders arbitrarily discriminated against their businesses. The Department of Justice filed a statement of interest suggesting that the executive orders likely violated the Equal Protection and the Commerce Clauses. After the Governor lifted the restrictions on plaintiffs, defendants filed a motion to dismiss. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PR-MI-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 16, 2020
U.S. v. Hampton Roads Regional Jail Authority
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-00410 (E.D. Va.)
PC-VA-0027
On August 31, 2020, Judge Rebecca Beach Smith in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia approved a settlement between the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Rights Division and Hampton Roads Regional Jail Authority. The agreement resolved the DOJ’s claims alleging unlawful conditions at the Hampton Roads Regional Jail (HRRJ) in violation of CRIPA and the ADA. Under the agreement, HRRJ will develop and implement policies, procedures, and training regarding adequate medical and mental health care and appropriate housing for prisoners with serious mental illness. These measures include specialized mental health housing units, increased training for medical, mental health, and security personnel, proper screening and assessment for medical and mental health concerns, adequate treatment planning and suicide prevention measures, and a quality assurance program. Per the agreement, the parties jointly appointed a monitor to assess and assist with compliance with the agreement. HRRJ must come into substantial compliance with the agreement within five years. The agreement can be terminated by court order.
View Case Detail (PC-VA-0027)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 15, 2020
Doe #1 v. Hall
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-00600 (E.D. Cal.)
CJ-CA-0026
On April 28, 2020, three individuals who are vulnerable to COVID-19 due to age and/or underlying medical conditions sued the Fresno County Sheriff’s Office and Fresno Police Department, claiming that the defendant’s requirement of in-person registration for sex offenders violate COVID-19 related orders. The plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment that the California law does not require in-person registrations and injunctive relief to halt the practice during the pandemic, and attorneys’ fees. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (CJ-CA-0026)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 15, 2020
Z.M. v. Baker
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-01370 (D.S.C.)
PB-SC-0007
In 2018, a South Carolina child with Autism Spectrum Disorder filed this class-action complaint in the United States District Court of the District of South Carolina. The plaintiff alleged that his rights under the Medicaid Act were violated when South Carolina’s Medicaid program did provide him with treatment for his disability, despite a wait of close to three years. The case remains pending.
View Case Detail (PB-SC-0007)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 13, 2020
Ochoa v. Los Angeles
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-06963 (C.D. Cal.)
PN-CA-0049
In 2020, residents of Los Angeles filed a putative class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The plaintiffs alleged that false claims of gang association and gang identity led to unreasonable searches, seizures, and imprisonment that violated their First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendment Rights. The case is ongoing as of September 2020.
View Case Detail (PN-CA-0049)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 12, 2020
Detroit Will Breathe v. Detroit
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-12363-RHC-APP (E.D. Mich.)
PN-MI-0013
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PN-MI-0013)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 10, 2020
Hunters Capital v. Seattle
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-00983 (W.D. Wash.)
PN-WA-0007
This lawsuit deals with the existence of Seattle's "Capitol Hill Occupying Protest" or CHOP. The plaintiffs, several business owners and individuals in the Capitol Hill neighborhood, filed this lawsuit against the city of Seattle, arguing that the city had left them open to violence, vandalism, and property destruction. They argued that this violated the Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Defendants responded with a motion to dismiss on all charges. The case is ongoing as of September 10, 2020.
View Case Detail (PN-WA-0007)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 9, 2020
Esshaki v. Whitmer
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-10831 (E.D. Mich.)
VR-MI-0075
This is a lawsuit seeking to enjoin the State of Michigan from enforcing its in-person signature requirement in order for candidates to be placed on the ballot. The District Court granted the plaintiffs a preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of the challenged voting laws and replacing them with new rules, which the defendants appealed. The Sixth Circuit upheld the injunction against enforcement of Michigan's in-person signature requirement but stayed the district court's new rules, arguing that the judge lacked the power to re-write Michigan's election laws. The election was held on August 4, and the case was dismissed on September 2.
View Case Detail (VR-MI-0075)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 7, 2020
USA v. Moalin
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 3:10-cr-04246 (S.D. Cal.)
NS-CA-0015
In 2010 and 2011, four Somali immigrants were indicted on criminal charges in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. The charges were related to the defendants’ alleged material and financial support for the terrorist group Al-Shabab. In February 2013, the defendants were convicted by jury verdict. The defendants each appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and the appeals were consolidated in April 2014. In a September 2, 2020 opinion, the Ninth Circuit severely questioned the legality of the NSA's bulk telephony metadata collection program under Fourth Amendment law and interpretation of FISA Subchapter IV, but upheld the convictions, saying that the information obtained through the FISA violation was not material to the successful FISA warrant application. The case remains ongoing until the window for appeal to the Supreme Court closes.
View Case Detail (NS-CA-0015)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 7, 2020
Michigan v. Devos
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-04478-SK (N.D. Cal.)
PB-CA-0057
This lawsuit arose out of the funding provisions for elementary and secondary schools in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) of 2020. Filed by eight states (California, Michigan, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin), Washington D.C., and four school districts (Chicago, Cleveland, New York City, and San Francisco), the lawsuit challenged a July 1, 2020 interim final rule from the Department of Education about how the funds may be distributed between private and public schools. On August 26, 2020, the court granted a preliminary injunction prohibiting enforcement of the interim final rule.
View Case Detail (PB-CA-0057)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 4, 2020
A.B.-B., et al. v. Morgan, et al.
Constitutional Accountability Center
Date: Aug. 31, 2020
By: Constitutional Accountability Center
People who arrive at the United States without documentation allowing them to enter the country may be summarily deported, without a hearing, unless they express an intention to apply for asylum or a fear of persecution in their home countries. In that situation, the asylum seeker is interviewed to ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 4, 2020
A.B.-B. v. Morgan
Wordpress
Date: Jun. 24, 2020
By: Hold CBP Accountable
On March 27, 2020, five asylum-seeking mothers and their children filed this action challenging the use of U.S. Border Patrol agents to screen asylum seekers for their “credible fear” of persecution.

Many people seeking asylum at the border must first pass a “credible fear” ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 29, 2020
Nio Documents
https://dcfederalcourtmavniclasslitigation.org/
Date: Jul. 27, 2020
By: MAVNI Federal Class Action Litigation
This page contains some of the useful documents relevant to MAVNIs in the Nio class. Click on the document title to open each document as a PDF.

Note that the updated email address to contact class counsel for the Nio litigation is nioclasscounsel@morganlewis.com *
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 29, 2020
Nio v. United States Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-00998 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0080
Non-citizen soldiers in the U.S. military brought this lawsuit in May 2017, challenging policies of the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense that unlawfully delayed their naturalization applications. The court certified a class and granted a preliminary injunction against the agencies on October 27, 2017. On May 22, 2019, the court granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, ruling that the agencies’ policy of delaying naturalization applications was arbitrary and capricious, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. The court issued a permanent injunction on August 20, 2020, and retained jurisdiction to enforce the injunction.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0080)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 28, 2020
ADA Settlement Agreement
Georgia.gov
Date: Feb. 3, 2020
By: Georgia Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities
On June 29, 2018, the Georgia Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities (DBHDD) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a joint status report in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia pursuant to their 2010 Settlement Agreement.

In the ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 28, 2020
United States v. State of Georgia
https://www.justice.gov/crt/case/united-states-v-state-georgia
Date: Jul. 15, 2016
By: Eric S. Dreiband (The United States Department of Justice)
The United States brought two separate cases against the State of Georgia involving its public services for people with mental health or development disabilities. Each lawsuit was resolved through separate landmark settlement agreements. Currently, the 2010 case remains pending. In the 2010 ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 28, 2020
Kirwa v. United States Department of Defense
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-01793 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0079
Three non-citizen soldiers in the U.S. military brought this class-action lawsuit against the Department of Defense in September 2017. The Department was refusing to certify their honorable military service for purposes of expedited naturalization under the Immigration and Nationality Act. The court issued a preliminary injunction in October 2017, requiring the Department to certify honorable service within 2 days of a soldier’s request, without imposing additional procedural or substantive requirements. As of August 2020, the plaintiffs and the Department of Defense are in mediation.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0079)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 26, 2020
Kirwa, et al. v. United States Department of Defense, et al., Civil Action No. 17-1793
MAVNI Federal Class Action Litigation
Date: May 31, 2019
By: MAVNI Federal Class Action Litigation
If you are a service member who has served or is serving in the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve (the “Selected Reserve”), who enlisted through the MAVNI program, and who has not yet become a naturalized U.S. citizen, you may be affected by ongoing litigation in the United States District ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 26, 2020
Resources Related to DOD’s Tightening of Rules and Discharges of Immigrants from the Military
American Immigration Lawyers Association
Date: Jul. 24, 2020
By: American Immigration Lawyers Association
In October 2017, the Department of Defense issued several memoranda that tightened the rules for immigrants joining the military.

The Congressional Research Service issued an In Focus report on expedited citizenship through military service describing the current law and eligibity, as ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 26, 2020
Foster v. Minnesota Department of Corrections
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 09-cv-20-633 (State Court)
PC-MN-0004
This petition for writ of habeas corpus and mandamus was submitted on April 15, 2020 in Minnesota state court. Three petitioners filed on behalf of themselves and the class they represented, namely prisoners in Moose Lake detention center, in Carlton County, Minnesota. They argued that the prison was doing an inadequate job containing the spread of COVID-19 amidst the 2020 pandemic. They requested a writ of mandamus and a writ of habeas corpus that would immediately release the petitioners and mitigate the conditions within the prison. On July 13, 2020 the court issued an order denying both writs. The court held that the prison was taking adequate steps to fight against the spread of the virus. Later that month, the petitioners appealed. The case is ongoing as of August 26, 2020.
View Case Detail (PC-MN-0004)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 24, 2020
Illinois Republican Party v. Pritzker
Case Category: Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-03489 (N.D. Ill.)
PR-IL-0002
Various Illinois GOP groups sued Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker over his executive order in response to the COVID-19 outbreak. The executive order banned meetings of more than 10 people, but allowed for certain exemptions such as religious meetings. The plaintiffs argued that this violated the First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment. They also argued that the Governor was superseding his power, because the emergency powers that he held only lasted for 30 days. After that he needed Congress to pass laws. The plaintiffs sought injunctive and declaratory relief. On July 2, the judge denied the plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. She held that the plaintiffs were unlikely to win on the merits and that the balance of harms weighed heavily against them. The plaintiffs appealed that same day. The case is ongoing as of August 24, 2020.
View Case Detail (PR-IL-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 24, 2020
Center for Legal Advocacy v. Marshall
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:11-cv-02285 (D. Colo.)
JC-CO-0011
The Center for Legal Advocacy brought this lawsuit on behalf of criminal defendants with mental illnesses in Colorado who were held in jail for months while awaiting competency restoration treatments. The parties agreed to several settlement agreements that the Center accused the state of violating. The most recent agreement, an April 2019 consent decree, imposes fines of up to $10,000,000 per year if the state fails to meet deadlines for providing restoration services.
View Case Detail (JC-CO-0011)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 23, 2020
McClendon v. City of Albuquerque Settlement
https://www.cabq.gov/
Date: Oct. 12, 2018
By: City of Albuquerque
Information about McClendon v. City of Albuquerque Settlement.
*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 23, 2020
McClendon Settlement Information
https://www.bernco.gov/
Date: Mar. 22, 2016
By: Bernalillo County
The proposed settlement of a class action could affect your rights if you are now, ever were, or ever will be detained at the Metropolitan Detention Center.

The class action case involves conditions at the Metropolitan Detention Center or MDC and allegations that the ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 22, 2020
Wright v. Family Support Division
https://equaljusticeunderlaw.org/
Date: Mar. 4, 2019
By: Equal Justice Under Law
In Missouri, the Family Support Division (FSD) has made the inability to complete childcare payments the first step in a downward spiral of criminal culpability. The FSD has the authority to suspend the driver’s license of any person who owes at least three months’ worth of child support ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 22, 2020
DNC v. RNC Consent Decree
https://www.brennancenter.org/
Date: 11/05/2016
By: Brennan Center for Justice
In 1982, after caging in predominantly African-American and Latino neighborhoods, the Republican National Committee and New Jersey Republican State Committee entered into a consent decree with their Democratic party counterparts*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 21, 2020
Coalition for Good Governance v. Raffensperger
https://moritzlaw.osu.edu/
Date: Aug. 20, 2020
By: Moritz College of Law (The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law)
In 1982, after caging in predominantly African-American and Latino neighborhoods, the Republican National Committee and New Jersey Republican State Committee entered into a consent decree with their Democratic party counterparts*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 21, 2020
Opinion: Cuban ICE detainee exposes unsafe Texas facilities, pleads for release to help battle coronavirus
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/
Date: Apr. 19, 2020
By: Roger Ernesto La O Muñoz (Houston Chronicle)
My name is Roger Ernesto La O Muñoz, and I am currently detained in the Joe Corley Detention Facility located in Conroe, Texas. I fled Cuba to escape physical and psychological torture including extrajudicial imprisonments, beatings and repeated retaliation from government officials due to my ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 21, 2020
Texas Civil Rights Project v. Wolf
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-02035 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0083
This case was brought by Texas Civil Rights Project as next friend for one hundred unaccompanied migrant children against top executives of the Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the CDC, and the HHS. They argued that a group of regulations, orders, and memos made up a process called "Title 42 Process," which skirted statutory law requiring certain safeguards on the removal of unaccompanied immigrant minors. While the process was created in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the plaintiffs argued that the process was an illegal expansion of executive authority. However, a few weeks later, before defendants responded, the plaintiffs withdrew the complaint without explaining why. The case is now closed.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0083)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 20, 2020
Welchen v. Sacramento
https://equaljusticeunderlaw.org
Date: Oct. 10, 2016
By: Equal Justice Under Law
Gary Welchen is a 50-year-old resident of Sacramento. Gary Welchen is an indigent arrestee who was kept in the county jail solely because he was too poor to pay the amount of money that the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department demanded for his release. Gary has experienced homelessness on ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 20, 2020
United States of America and Vulcan Society, Inc. v. City of New York
https://ccrjustice.org
Date: Jun. 15, 2016
By: Center for Constitutional Rights
United States and Vulcan Society v. City of New York is a class action lawsuit that charges the New York City Fire Department with racially discriminatory hiring practices that violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the United States Constitution, the New York State Constitution, and ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 20, 2020
La O Munoz v. Wolf
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 4:20-cv-02206 (S.D. Tex.)
IM-TX-0055
This petition for writ of habeas corpus was brought by several non-citizen detainees at Joe Corley Detention Facility. They argued that the conditions of their detention, especially the facility's failure to ensure their safety amidst the COVID-19 outbreak, represented violations of habeas corpus and their Fifth Amendment Due Process rights. They brought suit against the DHS, ICE, the Warden of Joe Corley Detention Center, and Attorney General William Barr. The judge rejected these claims on July 6. Later, the petitioners were released and the court dismissed the case on July 31. The case is closed.
View Case Detail (IM-TX-0055)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 18, 2020
Black Voters Matter v. Raffensperger
ACLU of Georgia
Date: Apr. 8, 2020
By: ACLU Georgia
The ACLU of Georgia filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Black Voters Matter challenging the constitutionality of requiring voters to buy postage stamps when submitting mail-in absentee ballots and mailing in absentee ballot applications. This is tantamount to a poll tax. *
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 18, 2020
Black Voters Matter v. Raffensperger
American Civil Liberties Union
Date: Apr. 13, 2020
By: American Civil Liberties Union
The American Civil Liberties Union and ACLU of Georgia filed a federal lawsuit April 8, 2020, on behalf of Black Voters Matter challenging the constitutionality of requiring voters to buy postage stamps when submitting mail-in absentee ballots and mailing in absentee ballot applications. This is ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 17, 2020
Impact Litigation
https://www.nwirp.org/our-work/impact-litigation/
By: Northwest Immigrant Rights Project
When laws and policies are unjust, we work for systemic change. During the last decade, we have positively affected many important cases with implications for national immigration laws. Our impact litigation work has helped fight racial profiling by border patrol officials in the Olympic Peninsula, ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 17, 2020
Coalition for Good Governance v. Raffensperger
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-01677 (N.D. Ga.)
VR-GA-0171
This suit was brought on April 20 by a nonprofit organization and five voter plaintiffs against the state of Georgia to challenge various provisions of Georgia’s election system. The plaintiffs sought an order requiring the defendants to postpone the June elections by three weeks, replace hand-marked paper ballots to a touchscreen, allow curbside voting, and to require safer conditions for election workers among other proposed remedies. On May 11, the defendants submitted a motion to dismiss the complaint, which the court granted on May 14. The plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration with a motion to expedite, which was denied on May 26. The plaintiffs have since filed an appeal to the Eleventh Circuit.
View Case Detail (VR-GA-0171)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 16, 2020
EEOC v. CELANESE ACETATE LLC
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 0:00-cv-03076-CMC (D.S.C.)
EE-SC-0007
In 2000, the EEOC filed this case against Celanese Acetate in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina. The EEOC alleged that Celanese Acetate discriminated against employees on the basis of race, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Civil Rights Act of 1991. A Black employee of that company intervened pursuant to the same statutes. In 2001, the plaintiffs and the defendant entered into a consent decree requiring the company to provide anti-discrimination training to employees, update its policies for investigating allegations of racial discrimination, remain subject to EEOC monitoring, and pay the individual plaintiff a cash settlement. The case closed at the end of the three year consent decree in 2004.
View Case Detail (EE-SC-0007)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 14, 2020
Missouri State Conference of the NAACP v. State of Missouri
https://www.brennancenter.org/
By: The Brennan Center for Justice (The Brennan Center)
The Missouri NAACP, the League of Women Voters of Missouri, and three individual voters sued the State of Missouri, Secretary of State John Ashcroft, and others, challenging a state law that restricts absentee voting to voters who provide one of six enumerated reasons, including “incapacity or ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 14, 2020
Case Summaries for June 15, 2020
Missouri Courts
Date: Jun. 15, 2020
By: Missouri Courts (Missouri Courts Judicial Branch of Government)
Since March 2020, Missouri has been under a state of emergency due to the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Section 115.658, RSMo, allows for limited absentee voting by mail. Some ballots cast by mail must be notarized, but no such requirement applies to absentee ballots cast pursuant to ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 14, 2020
League of Women Voters of Oklahoma v. Ziriax
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 118765 (State Court)
VR-OK-0019
In this case, the League of Women Voters of Oklahoma sued the Secretary of the Oklahoma State Election Board over its failure to allow voters to submit absentee ballots with a sworn statement under penalty of perjury, and instead forcing voters to obtain a notarized affidavit if they wanted to cast an absentee ballot. Plaintiffs cited a 2002 statute that allowed most statements which previously required a notarized affidavit to operate with the same force if sworn under penalty of perjury. The respondent argued that this statute only applied in judicial and quasi-judicial contexts, and that voting was neither. On May 4, 2020, the Oklahoma Supreme Court assumed original jurisdiction and sided with the plaintiffs in a two-paged order. The order prohibited the State Election Board from suggesting that getting a notarized affidavit was the only way to submit an absentee ballot. The case is now closed.
View Case Detail (VR-OK-0019)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 13, 2020
Public Citizen v. Trump
Public Citizen
Date: 2020
By: Public Citizen
On Feb. 8, Public Citizen, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and the Communications Workers of America sued the Trump administration to block an executive order signed by President Donald Trump on Jan. 30 that directs federal agencies to repeal two federal regulations for every new rule ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 13, 2020
Black Voters Matter Fund v. Raffensperger
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-01489 (N.D. Ga.)
VR-GA-0170
This is a class-action suit brought by a nonprofit organization and an individual against the state of Georgia to challenge the state’s requirement to purchase postage stamps for mail-in ballots. The plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief requiring election officials to provide prepaid returnable envelopes for absentee ballots and absentee ballot applications. On April 30, the preliminary injunction was denied for the June primaries and on August 11, the plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction was denied as to Count I of the amended complaint, and which was accordingly dismissed.
View Case Detail (VR-GA-0170)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 13, 2020
Driscoll v. Stapleton
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: DV 20-408 (State Court)
VR-MT-0017
This case challenged three Montana state election laws. The case was brought in March of 2020 in Montana state court, arguing that three Montana provisions were contrary to the Montana state constitution. The plaintiffs, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Commission, the Montana Democratic Party, and Chair of the Montana Democratic Party Robyn Driscoll, filed suit against Montana Secretary of State Corey Stapleton. First, the suit took aim at the Absentee Ballot Assistance Ban, which prohibited the handling of absentee ballots by third parties except under limited circumstances. Second, they argued against the Registration Requirement, which said that in those limited circumstances where third parties can handle ballots, they must sign a registry and give personal information about themselves and the voter. Finally, the case took issue with the Election Day Cutoff, which said that no ballots would be counted if they were not received by 8 p.m. on election day. On May 22, the court granted a preliminary injunction, prohibiting the state from enforcing these laws. The defendant appealed to the Montana Supreme Court. The case is ongoing as of August 13, 2020.
View Case Detail (VR-MT-0017)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 12, 2020
Jerry Thomas, et al., v. Jennifer Kent
Disability Rights California
Date: Sep. 19, 2016
By: Disability Rights California
Disability Rights California (DRC) filed a lawsuit in October 2014 on behalf of three individuals with disabilities against the California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) and its Director. DRC is challenging DHCS' failure to provide medically necessary services that allow the plaintiffs ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 12, 2020
Documents Produced in Response to Protect Democracy FOIA Request Regarding Department of Energy Climate Change Questionnaire
Protect Democracy
Date: 2019
By: Protect Democracy
On February 15, 2017, Protect Democracy sent a FOIA request to the Department of Energy (DOE) regarding a questionnaire that was sent to DOE employees by the Trump presidential transition team. The questionnaire sought, among other things, to identify agency employees who had worked on climate ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 12, 2020
Cohen v. Brown
The Brown University News Bureau
Date: Feb. 19, 1997
By: Mark Nickel (Brown University)
Brown University is taking its Title IX athletics case to the U.S. Supreme Court. Attorneys for the University filed a petition for a writ of certiorari late Tuesday, Feb. 18, 1997, asking the Supreme Court to review a split decision handed down Nov. 21, 1996, in Boston by a three-judge panel of ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 12, 2020
Self Advocacy Solutions v. Jaeger
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-00071 (D.N.D.)
VR-ND-0005
On May 1, 2020, Self Advocacy Solutions N.D., League of Women Voters of North Dakota, and an individual plaintiff filed a complaint against the Secretary of State of North Dakota and the County Auditor of Grand Forks County to challenge the absence of notice and cure procedures for the state’s signature matching requirement. The plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief. The plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction on May 11, which the court granted on June 3.
View Case Detail (VR-ND-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 12, 2020
American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon v. City of Portland
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: (State Court)
PN-OR-0008
This lawsuit brought by the ACLU of Oregon against the city of Portland alleged that the PPB was in violation of Oregon state law when they livestreamed protests that occurred in that city following the killing of George Floyd. The plaintiffs argued that this violated a state law that prohibited such conduct by police unless in pursuit of a criminal investigation. They also alleged that the PPB were in violation of a 1988 consent decree with the same provisions. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief. The case is ongoing as of August 12, 2020.
View Case Detail (PN-OR-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 12, 2020
Missouri NAACP v. Missouri
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 20AC-CC00169 (State Court)
VR-MO-0062
NAACP Missouri and League of Women Voters of Missouri sued the state of Missouri amidst the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, arguing that the state's restrictions on absentee voting ran contrary to the state constitution and state election law. Specifically, they claimed that state election law should be interpreted as to permit voters concerned about contracting the virus to obtain absentee ballots, and that failure to interpret the law in this way would result in violations to the state constitution. The case was brought before the Circuit Court of Cole County in the Missouri state court. The court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss on all counts. However, the plaintiffs brought the case to the state Supreme Court, which reversed all but one of the dismissals. The one they did not reverse was not brought before the Supreme Court. The case is ongoing as of August 12, 2020.
View Case Detail (VR-MO-0062)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 11, 2020
Kenny v. Wilson
aclu.org
Date: Mar. 16, 2017
By: American Civil Liberties Union
The American Civil Liberties Union filed a federal lawsuit challenging South Carolina’s “disturbing schools” law. The law allows students in school to be criminally charged for normal adolescent behaviors including loitering, cursing, or undefined “obnoxious” actions on school grounds ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 11, 2020
Rosie. D
http://rosied.org/
Date: Jan. 26, 2006
By: Center for Public Representation
Welcome to the Rosie D. website, an information and support resource for parents,attorneys, advocates, providers and other professionals. Click on the index headings on the left for more information about the ongoing transformation of the children’s mental health system in Massachusetts. The ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 11, 2020
LaRose v. Simon
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 62-CV-20-3149 (State Court)
VR-MN-0016
This case, brought by the Minnesota Alliance for Retired Americans Educational Fund, challenged two provisions of Minnesota election law in state court. The first provision, the Witness Requirement, mandated that voters have an eligible witness to sign off on their ballot sheet if they voted absentee. The second provision, the Election Day Receipt Deadline, said that absentee ballots must be turned in by 3 p.m. on Election Day if submitted individually and by 8 p.m. if submitted by mail. The suit argued that these laws violated the Minnesota constitution and U.S. Constitution even in normal times, but that amidst the COVID-19 pandemic they were even more egregious. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief. The parties more or less worked together to remedy the problem, submitting a joint stipulation and partial consent decree for the primary election to not enforce the Witness Requirement and to count ballots postmarked for Election Day, regardless of whether they arrived that day or not. In early August the court also issued an order relaxing these provisions with respect to the November 3 general election as well. This order was celebrated by the plaintiffs and the state of Minnesota, but decried as judicial overreach by GOP groups that had intervened in the case. The case is ongoing as of August 11, 2020.
View Case Detail (VR-MN-0016)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 10, 2020
Federal Class Action Over Alameda
rbgg.com
Date: Apr. 22, 2020
By: Rosen Bien Galvan & Grunfeld LLP
RBGG’s Ernest Galvan, Jeffrey Bornstein, and Kara Janssen represent eight named plaintiffs in a class action case filed in December 2018 against Alameda County on behalf of all prisoners, including prisoners with psychiatric disabilities, challenging the unconstitutional use of isolation, denial ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 10, 2020
Michigan
https://www.democracydocket.com/
Date: Jun. 2, 2020
By: Democracy Docket
Democracy Docket focuses on detecting, highlighting, and combating suppressive voting laws and practices that have the greatest impact on voters and elections. We spotlight those laws and practices that restrict the right to vote but may not always be the most newsworthy. And, we highlight efforts ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 10, 2020
Collins v. Adams
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-00375 (W.D. Ky.)
VR-KY-0009
This case was brought by several individual plaintiffs, the League of Women Voters of Kentucky, the Louisville Urban League, and the Kentucky Conference of the NAACP Branches against Kentucky Governor Andrew Beshear, the Kentucky Secretary of State Michael Adams, and the Chairman of the Kentucky Board of Elections Albert Benjamin Chandler. They argued that two requirements to voting, a photo ID requirement and a requirement mandating a valid excuse to vote absentee, were unconstitutional at least within the context of the 2020 COVID pandemic. They argued that the election laws forced voters to choose between their health and their right to vote. They sought declaratory and injunctive relief. The case is ongoing as of August 10, 2020
View Case Detail (VR-KY-0009)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 10, 2020
Michigan Alliance for Retired Americans v. Benson
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 20-000108-MM (State Court)
VR-MI-0078
The Michigan Alliance for Retired Americans and the Detroit/Downriver Chapter of the A. Philip Randolph Institute filed this lawsuit against Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson and Attorney General Dana Nessel. They argued that three Michigan election laws were in conflict with the Michigan state constitution and that one was in conflict with superseding federal law. These three laws were: 1) the Ballot Receipt Deadline, which mandates that absentee ballots sent via mail must arrive at the clerk by 8 p.m. on Election Day; 2) the Postage Requirement, which requires that voters use their own stamps and postage to mail their absentee ballots; and 3) the Voter Assistance Ban, which prohibits most third parties from handling a voter's ballot. The plaintiffs said that the three laws were against the Michigan constitution's assurance of equal protection and free speech, and that the third was also in violation of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief. The case is ongoing as of August 10, 2020.
View Case Detail (VR-MI-0078)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 10, 2020
New York v. United States Department of Labor
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-03020 (S.D.N.Y.)
PB-NY-0035
On April 14, 2020, the State of New York sued the Department of Labor to challenge the Department's regulations interpreting the Families First Coronavirus Response Act. Seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, the state alleged that the rule conflicted with the plain language and purpose of the statute by creating broad, unauthorized exclusions for employees and new restrictions and burdens. On August 3, the court denied the defendant's motion to dismiss and struck down four provisions of the FFRCA.
View Case Detail (PB-NY-0035)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 10, 2020
Williams v. Witte
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 4:20-cv-00304 (N.D. Ala.)
IM-AL-0011
After a rough start, this petition for habeas corpus was filed by 18 petitioners on April 29, 2020. Petitioners were non-citizen detainees who argued that being held in custody by ICE amidst the 2020 COVID pandemic represented violations of their due process rights and federal statutory law. The petitioners had medical problems which rendered them particularly vulnerable to COVID. The petitioners also filed a motion for a temporary restraining order. The court denied the motion for a temporary restraining order, holding that habeas corpus was only a vehicle to challenge the fact of a detainee's detention or its length, but not the conditions of confinement. Petitioners voluntarily dismissed the suit on June 19, 2020. The case is now closed.
View Case Detail (IM-AL-0011)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 9, 2020
Smith v. Aroostook County
aclumaine.org/
Date: Apr. 30, 2019
By: American Civil Liberties Union
The ACLU of Maine joined a case on behalf of Brenda Smith, who uses physician-prescribed medication to keep her opioid use disorder in remission. Treatment with MAT enables Ms. Smith to live free from the devastating symptoms of addiction. Most of Maine's jails block incarcerated people from access ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 9, 2020
Hart v. Berryhill - Litigation
Justice in Aging
Date: 04/25/2017
By: Justice in Aging
In 2015, along with partners Morrison & Foerster LLP and Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County, we filed a class action lawsuit against SSA on behalf of Mr. Hart and approximately 4,000 other residents of the broader Bay Area and Central Coast whose disability benefits were denied or terminated ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 7, 2020
Jacobson v. U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security
ACLU of Arizona
Date: Nov. 20, 2014
By: ACLU of Arizona
On November 20, 2014 the ACLU of Arizona together with the ACLU of San Diego and filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of local residents of Arivaca, Arizona challenging U.S. Border Patrol’s obstruction of efforts to monitor abuses at an interior checkpoint near the town of Arivaca. The lawsuit ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 7, 2020
Alhman v. Barnes
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 8:20-cv-00835 (C.D. Cal.)
JC-CA-0143
This putative class-action lawsuit, brought by inmates in Orange County Jail, argued that county and the sheriff violated the U.S. Constitution, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act in failing to provide adequate care amidst the 2020 coronavirus pandemic. Plaintiffs sought habeas corpus, injunctive relief, declaratory relief, and attorneys' fees and costs. The district court granted class certification and partially granted a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, which mandated more social distancing, providing for more PPE, and improved sanitation policies. The defendants appealed this decision to the Ninth Circuit, and applied in both the district court and the Ninth Circuit to stay the case in the lower court until the appeals court had ruled. Both denied these applications, however the Ninth Circuit remanded to the district court saying that the defendants could try to modify the injunction if there were any changed circumstances. Defendants did so, but the district court denied any modifications once again. The defendants appealed this decision to the Ninth Circuit, which likewise rejected the defendants' motion. Finally, the defendants went to the Supreme Court and asked them to stay the injunction while the Ninth Circuit heard the case on the merits. The Supreme Court obliged on August 5, staying the injunction. The case is ongoing as of August 7, 2020.
View Case Detail (JC-CA-0143)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 6, 2020
Jackson's Legacy
Santa Fe Reporter
By: Alexa Schirtzinger
In October 1985, a developmentally disabled man in his late 20s drank a cup of oven cleaner. Despite severe burns, he survived. He also unwittingly kicked off one of the longest lawsuits in the history of the state of New Mexico. Today, the Jackson lawsuit—named for Walter Stephen Jackson, and ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 6, 2020
KPMG Gender Pay, Promotion and Pregnancy Discrimination Class Action
Sanford Heisler Sharp, LLP
Date: 2020
By: Sanford Heisler Sharp, LLP
In June 2011, Class Representative Donna Kassman filed a lawsuit against KPMG to remedy KPMG’s systemic discrimination in pay and promotion, discrimination based on pregnancy, and chronic failure to properly investigate and resolve complaints of discrimination and harassment. In late 2011 and ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 6, 2020
Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley v. Sisolak
Alliance Defending Freedom
Date: Aug. 6, 2020
By: Alliance Defending Freedom
A provision of Nevada Gov. Steve Sisolak’s COVID-19 executive order unconstitutionally treated religious congregations different from many secular gatherings.
*
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 6, 2020
Lewis-McCoy v. Wolf
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-01142 (S.D.N.Y.)
IM-NY-0078
In February, 2020, a group of New York residents filed this class-action lawsuit against U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in the Southern District of New York. The plaintiffs alleged that the Trump administration retaliated against New York for allowing undocumented immigrants to obtain drivers licenses by blocking New York residents from participating in the Global Entry program, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, the Tenth Amendment, and the Fifth Amendment. In July, DHS voluntarily reversed the policy in question, after admitting that they had made misleading and inaccurate statements to the court. As of August 8, 2020, this case is still pending. The court is currently determining the extent the government’s misstatements and deciding if the case should be dismissed as moot.
View Case Detail (IM-NY-0078)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 6, 2020
Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley v. Sisolak
Case Category: Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-00303 (D. Nev.)
PR-NV-0001
A rural Nevada church brought this lawsuit against the Governor of Nevada on May 22, 2020, alleging that the governor’s COVID-19 gathering ban was a violation of the church’s First Amendment rights. The district court denied the church’s motions for preliminary injunctive relief; the church appealed this denial to the Ninth Circuit. Both the Ninth Circuit and the United States Supreme Court denied motions for injunction pending the Ninth Circuit’s appeal; as of August 6, 2020, the appeal is pending in the Ninth Circuit.
View Case Detail (PR-NV-0001)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 5, 2020
Gill v. Whitford
Campaign Legal Center
Date: Oct. 10, 2017
By: Campaign Legal Center
CLC, along with private co-counsel, represented 12 Wisconsin voters who have challenged the state’s Assembly district lines as an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander in Gill v. Whitford. This case is the first purely partisan gerrymandering case to go to trial in 30 years and has the potential ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 4, 2020
Youth Justice Coalition v. City of Los Angeles
aclusocal.org
Date: Mar. 15, 2018
By: American Civil Liberties Union
Youth Justice Coalition v. City of Los Angeles is a class action lawsuit filed on behalf of thousands of Angelenos whom the Los Angeles police and prosecutors have unfairly subjected to restrictive "gang injunctions" without due process.

Gang injunctions are civil court orders that ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 4, 2020
Sierra Club and Southern Border Communities Coalition v. Trump; State of California v. Trump
theusconstitution.org
Date: Jun. 26, 2020
By: Constitutional Accountability Center
In Sierra Club and Southern Border Communities Coalition v. Trump and State of California v. Trump, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that President Trump cannot lawfully divert funds that Congress has appropriated for other purposes for the construction of a border wall between ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 3, 2020
Duvall v. Hogan
aclu.org
Date: Jun. 28, 2016
By: American Civil Liberties Union
Following court orders dating back to 1993, the ACLU is representing detainees in Duvall v. Hogan, in an effort to respond to health and safety concerns that exist in a Baltimore City Detention center.

The filthy infrastructure and lack of adherence to previously issued court orders ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 3, 2020
Lyon v. ICE (Telephone Access for Immigration Detainees)
https://www.aclunc.org/
Date: Apr. 23, 2019
By: ACLU of Northern California
Approximately 34,000 immigrants are held in the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency’s (ICE) facilities on a daily basis, with roughly 500 to 600 of these immigrants held in northern California detention facilities. These detainees are not serving criminal sentences. They are being ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 3, 2020
2020 Census Litigation
(The Brennan Center)
The Brennan Center collected federal cases related to the 2020 census. The cases challenge attempts to add a citizenship question to the census, and allege insufficient funding budgeted for the Bureau's basic operations, inadequate preparation for the census, and potential politicization of the ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 1, 2020
Langford v. Bullock
https://www.aclu.org
Date: 03/02/2017
By: American Civil Liberties Union
This case was filed on behalf of prisoners following a serious disturbance in 1991 at the Montana State Prison (MSP) that resulted in seven deaths. The lawsuit challenges inadequate medical and mental health care, overcrowding, and inadequate environmental and fire safety conditions, classification ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 1, 2020
Civil Rights Groups File Lawsuit Against Clayton County Sheriff for Failure to Protect People in Jain from Escalating COVID-19 Outbreak
American Civil Liberties Union
Date: Jul. 2, 2020
By: American Civil Liberties Union
ATLANTA –Last night, the Southern Center for Human Rights, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the ACLU of Georgia filed a lawsuit in federal district court on behalf of four people incarcerated at the Clayton County Jail. The named defendants include the Clayton County Sheriff and several ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
July 30, 2020
We Sued the Trump Administration and Won
https://nwlc.org/
Date: Mar. 5, 2019
By: Sunu P. Chandy (National Women's Law Center)
In its October 29, 2019 ruling, the federal court has required the Trump Administration to continue pay data collection until the collection rate meets the appropriate percentage as argued by NWLC. The court will also be monitoring the Trump Administration through required status reports to ensure ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
July 30, 2020
ACLU-VA Reaches Settlement in COVID-19 Lawsuit Against VDOC on Behalf of 27 Individuals
ACLU of Virginia
Date: May 12, 2020
By: ACLU Virginia
After weeks of intense negotiations with the Office of the Attorney General, the ACLU of Virginia and Charlottesville attorney Elliott Harding reached a settlement agreement with Gov. Ralph Northam, Secretary of Public Safety Brian Moran and other state officials in the lawsuit initially brought on ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
July 30, 2020
Grinis v. Spaulding
https://www.aclum.org
Date: May 8, 2020
By: American Civil Liberties Union Massachusetts
In April 2020, the ACLU of Massachusetts, together with Fick & Marx LLP, filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of people incarcerated at the Federal Medical Center (FMC) in Devens, Massachusetts who are at severe risk of illness or death from COVID-19 due to advanced age or preexisting medical ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
July 29, 2020
Immigrant Advocates File Second Lawsuit Asking Federal Court to Order Immediate Release of Detained Migrants Due to COVID-19 Risk
ACLU of Arizona
Date: Jun. 15, 2020
By: ACLU of Arizona
Immigrant advocates on Monday filed a second lawsuit in federal court, requesting the immediate release of 13 people who are at high risk for severe illness or death from COVID-19. Since the lawsuit was filed one of the petitioners has been released. The remaining 12 petitioners are detained in two ...
View Link Detail