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
April 11, 2021
Aref v. Holder
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:10-cv-00539-RMU (D.D.C.)
PC-DC-0023
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PC-DC-0023)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
April 10, 2021
Gulino v. Board of Education Litigation
Garden City Group
Date: Mar. 22, 2021
By: Garden City Group
In 1996, plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the New York City Department of Education ("DOE")1 and the New York State Education Department (“SED”), alleging that the DOE and SED were violating Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, as amended 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. ("Title VII") by ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
April 10, 2021
Gulino v. The Board of Education of the City of New York and the New York State Education Department
Center for Constitutional Rights
Date: Sep. 23, 2020
By: Center for Constitutional Rights
Gulino v. The Board of Education of the City of New York and the New York State Education Department is a class-action lawsuit filed on behalf of public school teachers of color challenging the use of discriminatory tests and licensing rules to deprive them of equal salaries, pensions, benefits, ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
April 10, 2021
Cole v. Memphis
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 2:13-cv-02117 (W.D. Tenn.)
PN-TN-0002
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PN-TN-0002)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
April 9, 2021
Justice Department Moves to Intervene in Disability Discrimination Suit Against City of Chicago Regarding Pedestrians with Visual Disabilities
Department of Justice
Date: Apr. 8, 2021
By: Department of Justice
The Justice Department today moved to intervene in a disability discrimination lawsuit that private plaintiffs with visual disabilities brought against the City of Chicago under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (Section 504). The department’s ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
April 8, 2021
United States v. Jefferson County
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:75-cv-00666-CLS (N.D. Ala.)
EE-AL-0097
On May 27, 1975 The United States Department of Justice ("D.O.J.") filed this lawsuit under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e, et seq., and 42 U.S.C. § 1983, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama against the Jefferson County Personnel Board, and the municipal and other governmental jurisdictions within Jefferson County. The Plaintiffs claimed that the Defendants had discriminatory employment practices against Black people and women, and demanded monetary and injunctive relief. The parties entered several Consent Decrees aimed at correcting these practices, which were monitored closely by the courts for several decades. All of the consent decree were eventually modified. The County and the Board were both held in contempt for noncompliance, and were subject to receivership.The consent decrees against the Board, City, and County have all been dismissed. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (EE-AL-0097)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 8, 2021
Breen v. Mineta
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:05-cv-00654-RWR (D.D.C.)
EE-DC-0040
This case was brought on March 31, 2005, by current and former employees of the Federal Aviation Administration who were 40 years old or older against the Administrator of the FAA and the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation. Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, back pay and benefits, front pay, record correction, and attorneys' fees, alleging that the FAA and DOT discriminated against them by targeting their jobs for outsourcing and terminating their federal employment in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. On May 26, 2017, Judge Friedman granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment regarding the plaintiffs' disparate impact claim but denied the motion regarding the plaintiffs' disparate treatment claims. The case is ongoing, with the parties having reached a settlement on April 8, 2021.
View Case Detail (EE-DC-0040)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 8, 2021
Sourovelis v. City of Philadelphia
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 2:14-cv-04687-ER (E.D. Pa.)
CJ-PA-0002
On Aug. 11, 2014, four individuals sued the City of Philadelphia, the Mayor, the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office, the District Attorney, and the Commissioner of the Philadelphia Police Department, alleging that the defendants’ policies and practices with regard to civil forfeitures violated due process. Following settlement negotiations, the parties reached a set of consent decrees as to the claims for relief.
View Case Detail (CJ-PA-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 8, 2021
Ray v. Judicial Corrections Services
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 2:12-cv-02819 (N.D. Ala.)
CJ-AL-0006
Alabama residents alleged that an Alabama town had been using a private for-profit company to collect fines, costs, and fees. The company employees were called "probation officers," constructed documents that appeared to be court orders, and imprisoned people who could not pay the fines or fees. The plaintiffs in this federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama alleged that the defendants were violating both due process and equal protection (among other violations) because they incarcerated people for inability to pay fines due to indigency, because they did not provide proper notice or lawyers, and because they imposed terms of incarceration and costs that exceeded the statutory maximum allowed under state law. The case was dismissed with prejudice.
View Case Detail (CJ-AL-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 8, 2021
Blackmon-Malloy v. U.S. Capitol Police Board
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:01-cv-02221-EGS-JMF (D.D.C.)
EE-DC-0051
This case was brought by several African-American current or former U.S. Capitol Police Officers against the United States Capitol Police Board. Plaintiffs sought compensatory damages and injunctive relief, alleging that Defendant engaged in a pattern and practice of race discrimination in employment. On October 13, 2016, the court granted defendant's motion to dismiss most of plaintiffs' claims. The plaintiffs filed a motion to reconsider which the court denied, and the court reaffirmed its reasoning on July 30, 2019. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (EE-DC-0051)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 8, 2021
Gulino v. New York City Board of Education
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:96-cv-08414-KMW (S.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0260
In 1996, African American and Latino teachers in the New York City Public School System filed this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, under Title VI, Title VII and state laws, against the Board of Education of the New York City School District of the City of New York and the New York State Education Department. They claimed that the defendants misused two discriminatory tests, requiring them to pass as a condition to receive teaching licenses and employment benefits. The District Court certified a (b)(2) and (b)(3) class and eventually dismissed the Title VI claims on a summary judgment motion. After a bench trial, the court found in favor of the defendants with regard to the plaintiffs' Title VII claims. The plaintiffs appealed. The Second Circuit reversed and remanded. Eventually, the court enjoined the defendants from using the LAST test as a condition to receive teaching licenses. The court also started issuing individual judgments for monetary relief, which the defendants appealed to the Second Circuit. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (EE-NY-0260)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 8, 2021
DOJ CRIPA Investigation of Four Mississippi Prisons
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: (No Court)
PC-MS-0010
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PC-MS-0010)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
April 7, 2021
Common Cause Indiana v. Lawson II
Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Date: Mar. 13, 2021
By: COVID-Related Election Litigation Tracker
Plaintiffs brought suit requesting an injunction on Indiana's Noon Election Day Receipt Deadline for mail-in ballots, which causes disenfranchisement of voters (thousands in the June primary); requesting that mail-in ballots postmarked on or before Election Day but received within a reasonable time ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
April 7, 2021
American Civil Liberties Union v. Donald Trump
American Civil Liberties Union
Date: Jul. 18, 2017
By: American Civil Liberties Union
On July 10, 2017, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a federal lawsuit over the lack of transparency by President Trump’s election commission.

The lawsuit charges the commission with failing to comply with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which is designed to ensure public ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
April 7, 2021
Rabin v. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 4:16-cv-02276-JST (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0360
On April 27, 2016, the plaintiff, a certified public accountant over the age of forty, filed this class and collective action against PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. The defendant moved for a judgement on the pleadings and was denied; the plaintiff moved to certify a class and the motion was denied. The plaintiff filed a renewed motion for class certification on August 27, 2018, which was granted. The parties proposed an $11 million settlement that included changes to hiring practices, and the court approved the settlement on February 4, 2021. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (EE-CA-0360)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 5, 2021
ACLU v. Trump
Case Category: Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-01351 (D.D.C.)
PR-DC-0006
In 2017 the ACLU filed this suit for injunctive, mandamus, and declaratory relief against President Trump, Vice-President Pence, and the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, alleging violations of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The court denied the Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, claiming that jurisdiction for mandamus relief did not exist. President Trump ultimately dissolved the Commission, and the case is stayed pending the outcome of a related case, Dunlap v. Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity.
View Case Detail (PR-DC-0006)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
April 4, 2021
In re National Security Letter 2013 (13-1165)
https://www.eff.org/cases/re-national-security-letter-2013-13-1165
Date: Apr. 4, 2017
By: Electronic Frontier Foundation
This is the second of three active EFF legal challenges to the FBI's NSL authority. Links to the related NSL cases are here and here.

Since the first national security letter (NSL) statute was passed in 1986, the FBI has issued hundreds of thousands of such letters seeking the private ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
April 3, 2021
Elisa W v. The City of New York
A Better Childhood
Date: 2015
By: A Better Childhood
New York State fails to exercise sufficient oversight over New York City’s child welfare system and to take necessary steps to ensure that the City complies with federal law. In addition, NYC fails to monitor private agencies with which it contracts for foster care services. The result of these ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
April 3, 2021
State Settles Decade-Long Lawsuit Challenging Unconstitutional Punishment of Children with Life Behind Bars without the Possibility of Parole
ACLU Michigan
Date: Sep. 30, 2020
By: ACLU Michigan
State law was declared unconstitutional resulting in over a hundred released back to their communities; settlement requires access to rehabilitative programming and sets timeline for resentencing and opportunity for release for all youth whose sentences were ruled to be unconstitutional *
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
April 2, 2021
Brackeen v. Zinke
Case Category: Child Welfare
Trial Docket: 4:17-cv-00868 (N.D. Tex.)
CW-TX-0002
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (CW-TX-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 2, 2021
De La Fuente v. Hobbs
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-01276 (D. Ariz.)
VR-AZ-0059
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (VR-AZ-0059)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 2, 2021
Thompson v. Trump
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 1:21-cv-00400 (D.D.C.)
VR-DC-1178
On January 6, 2021, there was a violent insurrection and disruption of Congressional processes as members approved the results of the Electoral College in order to elect the next President and Vice President of the United States. On February 16, 2021, a U.S. Representative, in his personal capacity, sued the President of the United States in his personal capacity, the President’s personal lawyer, Proud Boys International, and Oath Keepers under the Ku Klux Klan Act alleging that the defendants plotted, coordinated, and executed a common plan to prevent Congress from certifying the results of the 2020 presidential election. This case has been assigned to Judge Amit P. Mehta and is ongoing.
View Case Detail (VR-DC-1178)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
April 1, 2021
Proclamation 10141 of January 20, 2021 Ending Discriminatory Bans on Entry to the United States
Govinfo.gov
Date: Jan. 20, 2021
By: Joseph Biden
Now, therefore, I, Joseph R. Biden JR., President of the United States, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 1185(a), hereby find that it is ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
April 1, 2021
Texas v. United States
MALDEF
Date: Mar. 29, 2021
By: MALDEF
Texas v. United States is a challenge to the legality of DACA by nine states led by Texas.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
April 1, 2021
Miranda v. Barr
ACLU
Date: May 29, 2020
By: ACLU
The American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Maryland, and Capital Area Immigrants’ Rights (CAIR) Coalition filed a federal lawsuit on April 30, 2020, challenging the Trump administration’s failure to provide fair hearings to people in immigration detention. The case was filed on behalf of ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
April 1, 2021
Heyer v. United States Bureau of Prisons
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 5:11-ct-03118-D (E.D.N.C.)
PC-NC-0014
In 2011, two deaf prisoners filed a lawsuit against the United States Bureau of Prisons in the US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina. The plaintiffs alleged violations of the Rehabilitation Act, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, their Fifth Amendment due process rights, First Amendment Freedom of Speech, and First Amendment Free Exercise of Religion. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that the defendants refused to provide them with effective communication and auxiliary aids necessary to accommodate their disability.
View Case Detail (PC-NC-0014)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 1, 2021
Don't Shoot Portland v. City of Portland
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-00917 (D. Or.)
PN-OR-0002
On June 5, 2020, a non-profit corporation advocating for social and racial justice and individual citizens filed this class action suit in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. The plaintiffs sued the City of Portland, alleging that the Portland police violated plaintiffs' First and Fourth Amendment rights by indiscriminately using tear gas against protestors involved in protected speech. They sought injunctive relief enjoining Portland police from using tear gas. On June 9, the court granted the TRO and enjoined the defendants from using tear gas. The following week, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, alleging that the defendants had changed their methods since the TRO, using "less-lethal” weapons against plaintiffs instead, and an additional TRO was issued related to the less-lethal weapons. On June 30, the plaintiffs moved for a finding of contempt and for sanctions against the defendant for non-compliance, which was later withdrawn. They also sought a preliminary injunction. On June 9, the court granted the plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order in part and restricted the use of tear gas to situations in which the lives or safety of the public or the police were at risk. The parties later stipulated to an additional TRO which additionally restricted the use of less-lethal launchers, rubber ball distraction devices, aerosol restraints, and long-range acoustical devices. On June 30, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a finding of contempt and sanctions against the defendant. After briefing and oral argument, the court granted the motion in part; the parties exchanged remedy proposals and filed a joint remedy proposal on December 18. On March 16, 2021, the court ordered sanctions that included training for Portland Police Bureau officers and circulating the TRO. The case is ongoing as of April 1, 2021.
View Case Detail (PN-OR-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 1, 2021
Crum v. State of Alabama
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:94-cv-00356 (M.D. Ala.)
EE-AL-0100
In this case filed in 1994, Alabama state employees claimed endemic race discrimination by a state government boards and departments, including the Department of Public Health and the Alabama Labor Board. A large number of complaints were consolidated, and years of litigation followed. In 2009, however, the Court denied class certification, and allowed all the previously consolidated cases to proceed separately. Over time, individual plaintiffs either stipulated to dismiss their claims or saw their claims dismissed by the court. In August 2017, the case was closed as the last plaintiff's case was converted into a separate lawsuit.
View Case Detail (EE-AL-0100)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 1, 2021
Amanda D. v. Hassan
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 1:12-CV-00053-SM (D.N.H.)
PB-NH-0003
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PB-NH-0003)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 31, 2021
Pars Equality Center v. Pompeo
Free Law Project
Date: Mar. 24, 2021
By: Court Listener
On April 7, 2011, DOJ conducted an investigation of the New Hampshire Mental Health System pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The DOJ concluded that the State of New Hampshire failed to provide sufficient community services to qualified individuals with mental illness in the ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
March 31, 2021
Dubon Miranda v. Barr
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-01110 (D. Md.)
IM-MD-0019
On April 30, 2020, the three immigration detainees in Maryland filed a class action lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s failure to provide fair hearings to people in immigration detention on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated. The complaint and habeas corpus petition pointed to two flaws in the government's bond hearings that made subsequent detentions a violation of procedural due process and the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). On May 5, 2020, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a temporary restraining order and/or preliminary injunction, which was granted on May 29. On July 27, 2020, the defendants appealed the preliminary injunction to the Fourth Circuit (No. 20-1828). The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-MD-0019)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 31, 2021
Karsjens v. Minnesota Department of Human Services
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 0:11-cv-03659-DWF-JJK (D. Minn.)
CJ-MN-0002
Patients currently civilly committed in the Minnesota Sex Offender Program (MSOP) filed a lawsuit against the Minnesota Department of Health & Human Services and MSOP seeking injunctive relief and damages. They alleged that defendants violated the Due Process Clause, the First Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, the Minnesota Constitution, and the Minnesota Civil Commitment and Treatment Act. The Court certified this group as a class. On August 15, 2012, the Court ordered that the Minnesota Commissioner of Human Services create a Sex Offender Civil Commitment Advisory Task Force. On June 17, 2015, the court granted the plaintiffs' request for declaratory relief, but on January 3, 2017 the Eighth Circuit reversed the district court's ruling. After the district court issued a new order in light of that remand, the plaintiffs appealed and the Eighth Circuit affirmed in part and denied in part that judgment on February 24, 2021. The appeals court remanded the case and it is ongoing.
View Case Detail (CJ-MN-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 31, 2021
Pars Equality Center v. Pompeo
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:18-cv-01122 (W.D. Wash.)
IM-WA-0040
On July 31, 2018, two non-profit organizations and fifteen individuals filed this class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The plaintiffs challenged the Trump Administration's implementation of the waiver provision of the Travel Ban (Presidential Proclamation No. 9645), alleging that it violates the Administrative Procedure Act and the Fifth Amendment. The case was transferred to the Northern District of California. After the Trump Administration concluded, President Biden revoked the Travel Ban and ordered that visa applications resume processing on January 20, 2021. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-WA-0040)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 31, 2021
Williams v. Mohawk Industries
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 4:04-cv-00003-HLM (N.D. Ga.)
IM-GA-0002
On January 6, 2004, current and former employees of Mohawk Industries Inc., a giant carpet and rug manufacturer, filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court Northern District of Georgia, alleging that Mohawk engaged in a massive scheme to hire undocumented immigrants for the express purpose of depressing employee wages. Plaintiff alleged that defendants' scheme violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"), 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq., and the Immigration and Nationality Act. On July 22, 2010, the District Court approved a settlement between the parties, which included an $18 million settlement fund and a commitment from the defendants to conduct training regarding verification of employment eligibility. This case has finished.
View Case Detail (IM-GA-0002)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 30, 2021
Electronic Privacy Information Center v. Immigration & Customs Enforcement
Mink LLC
Date: Jan. 31, 2020
By: Docketbird
On January 6, 2004, current and former employees of Mohawk Industries Inc., a giant carpet and rug manufacturer, filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court Northern District of Georgia, alleging that Mohawk engaged in a massive scheme to hire undocumented immigrants for the express ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 30, 2021
EPIC v. ICE (Palantir Databases)
Electronic Privacy Information Center
Date: Jan. 30, 2020
By: Electronic Privacy Information Center
ICE has contracted with Palantir Technologies, Inc. to build and/or maintain information systems that contain vast amounts of information on individuals, such as the FALCON systems and the Investigative Case Management (ICM) system. In its 2018 Budget in Brief, DHS listed $20.3 million in funding ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
March 30, 2021
Emami v. Nielsen
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-01587-JD (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0140
On March 13, 2018, 26 individuals who have been denied a travel visa, or have had relatives denied a travel visa under Donald Trump's "Travel Ban" sued the Trump Administration claiming the Travel Ban's policy of denying individuals travel visas because of their national origin was unconstitutional and violated federal law. President Biden revoked the Travel Ban and ordered that visa applications resume processing on January 20, 2021. The case is currently ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0140)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 30, 2021
Electronic Privacy Information Center v. U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-02684 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0042
This Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) complaint was filed on Dec. 15, 2017. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) sued Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for records pertaining to the data collection systems FALCON and Investigative Case Management (ICM). EPIC argued that ICE's use of these systems risked violating the Privacy Act of 1974 and the E-Government Act. ICE finished document production by November 2018. On July 25, 2019, EPIC raised challenges to specific withholdings of documents, and ICE released the withheld documents. On January 31, 2020, the parties settled, with EPIC receiving attorneys' fees. This case has finished.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0042)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 30, 2021
Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center (CREEC) v. Hospitality Properties Trust
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 3:15-cv-00221 (N.D. Cal.)
DR-CA-0053
The CREEC and three plaintiffs who require wheelchairs for mobility brought this class action suit for declaratory and injunctive relief against Hospitality Properties Trust (HPT). Plaintiffs asked that the court declare HPT's practices of not providing wheelchair-accessible vehicles to guests with disabilities to be in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act and Unruh Civil Rights Act. Further, plaintiffs requested an injunction compelling HPT to comply with the ADA and Unruh Civil Rights Act. The plaintiff sought for a class certification; however, it was denied for lack of commonality and typicality. The defendant sought summary judgment, claiming it was not a responsible entity under ADA, but the court denied the motion. The parties reached a settlement in January 2020. The Clearinghouse does not have access to the settlement, but according to CREEC, HPT agreed to provide transportation at the covered hotels that complied with the ADA.
View Case Detail (DR-CA-0053)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 29, 2021
Clarendon County in Black & White: A Visit to the Home of Briggs v. Elliott, 50 Years After Brown v. Board of Education
Date: Spring 2004
By: David J. Garrow
7 Green Bag 2d 237
As Brown’s fiftieth anniversary approaches on May 17, many eyes will turn towards Clarendon County to measure what has changed, and what has not changed, over the past five decades. Although Clarendon is still a largely rural, generally poor, majority-black county, Roberts’s success exemplifies ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 29, 2021
Briggs v. Elliott
South Carolina Encyclopedia
Date: May 17, 2016
By: W. Marvin Dulaney ( University of South Carolina, Institute for Southern Studies)
Originally a lawsuit filed by twenty African American parents in Clarendon County for equal educational opportunities for their children, Briggs v. Elliott was the first case in the twentieth century to challenge the constitutionality of racially segregated schools. The case carries the names of ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
March 29, 2021
Disability Rights Florida v. Jones
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-00179-HES-JRK (M.D. Fla.)
DR-FL-0006
In 2018, Disability Rights Florida filed suit against the Florida Department of Corrections (FDC) in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida for declaratory and injunctive relief. The plaintiff alleged that FDOC failed to provide adequate mental health treatment to its prisoners in violation of the Eighth Amendment, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Rehabilitation Act. The parties reached a settlement that involved substantive reforms to the mental health treatment system, ongoing compliance monitoring, and attorneys' fees.
View Case Detail (DR-FL-0006)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 27, 2021
Barr v. Aleman Gonzalez
SCOTUSblog
Date: Dec. 23, 2020
By: SCOTUSblog
Issue: Whether an alien who is detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1231 is entitled by statute, after six months of detention, to a bond hearing at which the government must prove to an immigration judge that the alien is a flight risk or a danger to the community.*
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
March 26, 2021
Trump v. Deutsche Bank
Case Category: Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority
Trial Docket: 1:19-cv-03826 (S.D.N.Y.)
PR-NY-0009
This is a case about former President Donald Trump’s dispute with Congressional subpoenas requesting personal tax and financial documents. The case was brought in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by Donald Trump, his children, and other affiliates, on April 29, 2019. The complaint alleged that the Congressional subpoenas were issued to harass the President and lacked a legitimate legislative purpose. The case was eventually consolidated with Trump v. Mazars, LLP, which was heard by the Supreme Court in July 2020 and later remanded for further proceedings.
View Case Detail (PR-NY-0009)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 26, 2021
Briggs v. Elliott
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: Civ. A. No. 2657 (D.S.C.)
SD-SC-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (SD-SC-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 26, 2021
Whitfield v. Thurston
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 4:20-cv-00466 (E.D. Ark.)
VR-AR-0194
In April 2020, two independent candidates for public office in Arkansas filed this lawsuit in the Eastern District of Arkansas against the Secretary of State of Arkansas. The plaintiffs alleged that the state’s ballot access provisions were overly restrictive, particularly in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, and violated the First and Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court denied the plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction and entered a judgment in favor of the defendant. The plaintiffs have appealed this case to the Eight Circuit, which has not issued an opinion yet. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (VR-AR-0194)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 25, 2021
Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-00302-RPM (D. Colo.)
IM-CO-0011
The Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center (CREEC) filed this suit against DHS and ICE under FOIA, seeking information regarding substandard and abusive conditions of confinement against individuals detained at two immigration detention facilities. As of March 25, 2021, a settlement has been reached as to the evidence, but litigation continues for the plaintiff's attorney's fees and costs.
View Case Detail (IM-CO-0011)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 25, 2021
A.I.I.L. v. Sessions
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 4:19-cv-00481-JAS (D. Ariz.)
IM-AZ-0028
In October 2019, immigrant children and their parents filed a putative class-action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for Arizona. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants violated their constitutional rights under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments by separating children from their parents at the U.S. border. The case is ongoing
View Case Detail (IM-AZ-0028)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 25, 2021
Muhammad v. Terhune
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 2:95-CV-00942 (D.N.J.)
PC-NJ-0014
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PC-NJ-0014)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 25, 2021
Big House Books v. Hall
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-00259-DPJ-FKB (S.D. Miss.)
PC-MS-0008
In April 2018, two prisoners at the South Mississippi Correctional Institution (SMCI) and non-profit Big House Books filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi. The plaintiffs sued SMCI and the Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC), alleging that the MDOC’s new policy of barring prisoners from receiving free books unless they are religious books violates the First and the Fourteenth Amendments. After little activity in the case, the court issued an order to show cause why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. The parties then filed a stipulated of dismissal on December 19, 2018, indicating that earlier in the year the parties reached an agreement to settle the case. The defendants changed their policies and practices so that prisoners could receive free books from distributors like the plaintiff whether or not they were religious. The defendants also agreed to pay the plaintiffs $6,000 in attorney fees. This case is now closed.
View Case Detail (PC-MS-0008)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 24, 2021
How America’s Most Famous Federal Prison Faced a Dirty Secret
The Marshall Project
Date: Dec. 5, 2016
By: Andrew Cohen
The mentally ill in federal prisons are on the verge of a big victory. For many years the most famous federal prison in America, the “Supermax” facility in Florence, Colorado, held a dirty secret: even though it was not permitted by law to house mentally ill prisoners, many of the men locked ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
March 24, 2021
United States v. Louisiana
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-608 (M.D. La.)
PB-LA-0008
The Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against Louisiana alleging that their policies of institutionalizing individuals with serious mental illnesses was operated in a manner that too often resulted in unnecessary admission to nursing facilties when community-based services would be more appropriate. The US alleged that this violated Title II of the American's with Disabilities Act which requires that states serve individuals with disabilities in the least segregated manner appropriate to their needs. Louisiana reached a settlement agreement with the US the same day the lawsuit was filed. The state agreed to review its nursing facilities and new referrals for admission to determine whether seriously mentally ill residents would be better served in their communities. They also agreed to expand community-based services for the mentally ill.
View Case Detail (PB-LA-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 24, 2021
Catchings v. Wilson
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:21-cv-00428-GLR (D. Md.)
JC-MD-0018
In 2021, individuals held at the Chesapeake Detention Facility filed this class action lawsuit and habeas petition which alleged numerous issues with the facility's response to COVID-19. The plaintiffs alleged that their rights under their Fifth, Fourteenth, and Eighth Amendments were violated by the risk they faced of contracting COVID-19 and by the defendants' policies of placing individuals in effective solitary confinement. They asked the court for a temporary restraining order governing conditions in the facility; however, prior to the resolution of that motion, they reached an agreement with the defendants regarding certain precautions to take. However, the case is still proceeding to determine whether the court should issue a preliminary or permanent injunction against the defendants.
View Case Detail (JC-MD-0018)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 23, 2021
Raimondo v. FBI (Internet Free Speech)
ACLU
Date: Aug. 27, 2018
By: ACLU Northern California
In 2004, the FBI conducted a “threat assessment” of long-time journalists and commentators Justin Raimondo and Eric Garris, as well as their website, Antiwar.com. In violation of the federal Privacy Act, this threat assessment compiled descriptions of the journalists’ First Amendment ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 23, 2021
Raimondo v. FBI
Knight First Amendment Institute
Date: 2019
By: Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University (Columbia University)
On August 3, 2018, the Knight Institute, the Center for Constitutional Rights, and Color of Change filed an amicus brief in Raimondo v. FBI, a case in which the Ninth Circuit is considering challenges brought by two journalists against the government for maintaining records documenting their First ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 22, 2021
In re National Security Letter 2013 (13-1165)
https://www.eff.org/cases/re-national-security-letter-2013-13-1165
Date: May 1, 2013
By: Electric Frontier Foundation
Since the first national security letter (NSL) statute was passed in 1986, the FBI has issued hundreds of thousands of such letters seeking the private telecommunications and financial records of Americans without any prior approval from courts. In addition to this immense investigatory power, NSL ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
March 22, 2021
Raimondo v. Federal Bureau of Investigation
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 3:13-cv-02295-JSC (N.D. Cal.)
NS-CA-0020
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (NS-CA-0020)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 21, 2021
Padilla v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:18-cv-00928 (W.D. Wash.)
IM-WA-0038
Three plaintiffs, mothers of minor children, filed this class action complaint challenging the federal government's forcible separation of minor children from their parents, as well as its practice of prolonging the separation by failing to conduct credible fear interviews in a timely manner and its practice of excessively prolonging the detention of asylum seekers by delaying their bond hearings. They plan not to pursue the separation claims, pending the government's compliance with a nationwide injunction against family separation, but they continue to seek relief for the bond hearings claims. The district court certified two classes; the Credible Fear Interview Class and the Bond Hearing Class. The district court ordered a preliminary injunction, mandating that the government conduct bond hearings within seven days of a bond request and finding that denying bond hearings to these class members is unconstitutional. In March 2020, a Ninth Circuit panel affirmed the district court's nationwide preliminary injunction and remanded proceedings to the district court to reconsider the procedures for the bond hearings. The defendants filed a writ of certiorari in the Supreme Court, seeking further review of the Ninth Circuit's decision. The Supreme Court granted the cert petition on January 11, 2021. In the same order, it vacated the judgment and remanded the case the Ninth Circuit in light of the Court’s decision in Thuraissigiam v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security earlier in the summer. The defendants then requested the Ninth Circuit hold the appeal in abeyance. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-WA-0038)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 21, 2021
Council on American-Islamic Relations - Chicago v. U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-03097 (N.D. Ill.)
IM-IL-0021
In May 2018, the Council on American-Islamic Relations - Chicago (CAIR-Chicago) filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The plaintiff sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services for failing to process its FOIA request for immigration records since the 2008 institution of the Controlled Application Review & Resolution Program, alleging that this conduct was a wrongful delay of release of records in violation of FOIA. The plaintiffs dismissed their claims without explanation on June 28, 2019.
View Case Detail (IM-IL-0021)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 19, 2021
State of California v. Sessions
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:17-cv-04701 (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0094
On Aug. 14, 2017, California sued the DOJ over policies targeting "sanctuary" jurisdictions by imposing immigration enforcement conditions on federal funding for law enforcement. In October 2018 the district court granted summary judgment for California and issued a nationwide injunction. The DOJ appealed to the Ninth Circuit. On July 13, 2020, the Ninth Circuit upheld the bases for the injunction but limited its scope, thus reducing it from a nationwide injunction to one applicable only within California's borders. The government then filed for review with the Supreme Court but dismissed their petition following the change in administration from President Trump to President Biden.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0094)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 18, 2021
Iranian Alliances Across Borders v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 8:17-cv-02921-GJH (D. Md.)
IM-MD-0005
On October 2, 2017 the Iranian Alliances Across Borders filed this complaint on behalf of a group of plaintiffs of Iranian descent. The suit challenges President Trumps Sept. 24 Proclamation indefinitely restricting travel from the following eight countries: Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela and Yemen. Otherwise known as EO-3, the proclamation was the President's third attempt to restrict travel from particular countries. The first attempt was by and Executive Order (EO) issued in Jan. 2017. In response to that order, a slew of litigation ensued. That litigation, and the decisions it led to, eventually led the President to issue a new, revised order. However, the litigation continued, and in September President issued his proclamation just as the second EO was about to expire. In response to that proclamation, and alongside other suits challenging the EOs, plaintiffs filed their complaint in the Maryland District Court. Judge Chuang was assigned to the case. In their complaint, plaintiffs alleged that the proclamation targeted and discriminated against Muslims and that it violated the Immigration and Nationality Act by discriminating based on national origin. Plaintiffs also alleged that the order violated the First Amendment's Establishment and Free Speech Clauses and the Fifth Amendment's Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses. As relief, plaintiffs requested a nationwide injunction barring the government from enforcing the new order.
View Case Detail (IM-MD-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 18, 2021
Adam v. Pompeo
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-03079-SAG (D. Md.)
IM-MD-0018
On October 20, 2020, the two Sudanese refugees filed suit alleging violations of the APA and the Fifth Amendment due process clause for failure to adjudicate their follow-to-join (FTJ) petitions in a reasonable time. The plaintiffs sought an order to compel the defendants to promptly adjudicate their FTJ petitions under 28 U.S.C. § 1361. The case is ongoing as of March 3, 2021.
View Case Detail (IM-MD-0018)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 17, 2021
FHJC v. Esplanade Venture Partnership et al.
Case Category: Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-03600 (S.D.N.Y.)
FH-NY-0028
In the fall of 2012, the Fair Housing Justice Center received a complaint alleging that the Esplanade Residences refused to rent to people who use wheelchairs. As a result, the FHJC launched an investigation into the matter by sending "testers" to observe the residences' polices while posing as potential renters. Based on the investigation's results, on May 29, 2013, the FHJC filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York under the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3601. It alleged violations of the FHA for discrimination of the bases of disability, religion, and race, as well as violations of state fair housing laws. The parties reached a settlement on December 11, 2014 and a stipulation for voluntary dismissal was filed on January 8, 2015. The settlement included policy changes to conform the defendants' policies to the requirements of the Fair Housing Act, as well as a monetary settlement of $297,500 for damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs.
View Case Detail (FH-NY-0028)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 17, 2021
Fenty v. Penzone
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-01192-SPL (D. Ariz.)
JC-AZ-0016
In 2020, individuals held in Maricopa County's jails filed this class action lawsuit and habeas petition to challenge the jails' response to COVID-19. The plaintiffs alleged that their constitutional rights and statutory rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Rehabilitation Act were violated by the defendants' lack of action to protect them from COVID-19. They requested the certification of several classes, which was granted, and a preliminary injunction, including the release of medically vulnerable individuals, which was not. The case is ongoing
View Case Detail (JC-AZ-0016)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 16, 2021
Class Action Civil Rights Suit Filed over Brutal NYPD Policing of BLM Protests
Beldock Levine & Hoffman LLP
Date: Aug. 20, 2019
By: Beldock Levine & Hoffman LLP
Beldock Levine & Hoffman, Gideon O. Oliver, Cohen & Green, and Wylie M. Stecklow announce the filing of a major class action lawsuit against the City of New York, Mayor Bill de Blasio, New York Police Commissioner Dermot Shea, and other City officials, over the NYPD’s violent policing of the ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 16, 2021
Payne et al. v De Blasio et al.
New York Civil Liberties Union
Date: Oct. 26, 2020
By: New York Civil Liberties Union
The New York Civil Liberties Union and The Legal Aid Society filed a lawsuit against Mayor Bill de Blasio, Police Commissioner Dermot Shea, Chief of Department Terence Monahan, the City of New York, and several individual police officers for their roles in the indiscriminate brutalizing of peaceful ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 16, 2021
Baltimore v. Trump
Democracy Forward Foundation
Date: May 15, 2020
By: Democracy Forward
In January 2018, the Trump Administration made an unlawful, under-the-radar change to the State Department’s definition of “public charge,” a provision in immigration law that limits who may come to the United States. Specifically, the State Department amended the Foreign Affairs Manual to ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
March 16, 2021
Wood v. De Blasio
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-10541 (S.D.N.Y.)
PN-NY-0058
A Queens resident filed this lawsuit against the NYPD on December 14, 2020. The suit alleged that the NYPD regularly falsely arrested and used excessive force against peaceful protesters during the 2020 racial justice protests in violation of the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments. It also alleged the common law violations of assault, battery, and false arrest and imprisonment by NYPD officers. The amended complaint requested class certification with the plaintiff as class representative. The plaintiff sought compensatory and punitive damages, reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees, and any other relief the Court deemed just and proper to the plaintiff and class members.
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0058)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 16, 2021
Payne v. de Blasio
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-08924 (S.D.N.Y.)
PN-NY-0057
Eleven New York City residents filed this lawsuit against the City of New York and the NYPD on December 14, 2020. The suit alleged that the NYPD falsely arrested and used excessive force against peaceful protesters during the 2020 racial justice protests in violation of the First and Fourth Amendments, as well as the New York State Constitution. It further alleged that the plaintiffs suffered physical and mental injuries as a result of the NYPD's practice of using excessive force against peaceful protesters. The plaintiffs sought declaratory relief, compensatory and punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and costs, and any other relief the Court deemed just and proper.
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0057)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 16, 2021
Bhattarai v. Nielsen
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:19-cv-00731 (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0145
On Feb. 10, 2019, a group of TPS beneficiaries from Honduras and Nepal and their U.S.-citizen children filed this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, challenging the Department of Homeland Security's decisions to terminate TPS designations for those two countries. The plaintiffs alleged that these decisions violated the APA, equal protection, and due process. In March, 2019, the case was stayed pending the resolution of an appeal in a parallel case, Ramos v. Nielsen, challenging TPS rescissions for another group of countries. As of March 16, 2021, DHS had extended TPS for Honduras and Nepal through October 4, 2021
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0145)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 16, 2021
Sow v. City of New York
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:21-cv-00533 (S.D.N.Y.)
PN-NY-0059
A group of ten New York City residents filed this class action suit against the NYPD and the City of New York on January 21, 2021. The suit alleged that the NYPD regularly falsely arrested and used excessive force against peaceful protesters during the 2020 racial justice protests in violation of the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments. The plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief, compensatory and punitive damages, reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees, and any other relief the Court deemed just and proper to the plaintiffs and class members.
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0059)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 14, 2021
United States v. Charter Realty Company
Case Category: Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Trial Docket: 196-73 (E.D. Va.)
FH-VA-0007
This is a case about racial discrimination perpetuated by a Virginia real estate company. On May 14, 1973, the United States Department of Justice sued the Charter Realty Company under the Fair Housing Act, claiming that the defendant was engaged in a pattern and practice of denying Fair Housing rights by failing to provide Black people with the same level of real estate brokerage services provided to white people. Because the defendant expressed a willingness to cooperate, the plaintiff agreed not to pursue litigation to determine whether the defendant had engaged in discriminatory conduct in the past. Instead, the court approved a consent decree on the day the complaint was filed. The decree enjoined the defendant from engaging in discriminatory behavior on account of race, color, religion, or national origin. The defendant also agreed to create a program to comply with the FHA and file periodic reports with the court for two years following the consent decree. The consent decree is the only document available for this case, so no other information is known.
View Case Detail (FH-VA-0007)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 12, 2021
Portland and Oakland Sue Trump Administration for Unlawful Deployment of Federal Agents and Unconstitutional Interference with Local Control
Public Rights Project
Date: Oct. 15, 2020
By: Public Rights Project
The cities of Portland and Oakland, represented by co-counsel at Public Rights Project, filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s new policy and practice of unlawfully deploying federal law enforcement under the guise of protecting federal property. The purpose of this new policy and ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
March 12, 2021
Human Rights First v. Wolf
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-03764 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0091
Plaintiff human rights organization sued the Acting Secretary of Homeland Security alleging that revisions to asylum eligibility violated several laws. Federal courts reviewing similar suits in other districts granted a nationwide preliminary injunction that applied here, and the cases are pending review and revision by the Biden administration.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0091)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 12, 2021
Pangea Legal Services v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-09253 (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0173
Legal organizations sued the Department of Homeland Security for allegedly creating over-restrictive rules regarding asylum-seekers. The court reviewed this and a related case and granted a preliminary injunction enjoining the enactment of the changed rules. Due to the administration change, this suit has been stayed pending a review and potential modification of the relevant regulations.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0173)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 12, 2021
Immigration Equality v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-09258 (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0174
Nonprofit organizations serving LGBTQIA+/H populations sued the Department of Homeland Security alleging that the latter's revised rules surrounding asylum seekers were overly restrictive. The court granted a preliminary injunction and has since stayed the case due to the administration change pending review and revision of the regulations.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0174)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 12, 2021
N.H. ex rel J.H. v. Edwards
Case Category: Juvenile Institution
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-00293-JWD-EWD (M.D. La.)
JI-LA-0013
The plaintiffs filed suit in the Middle District of Louisiana, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and its severity in Louisiana, on behalf of children confined in four secure care facilities. The plaintiffs sought a temporary restraining order that would require improved testing measures, better care of the children confined, and the release of children who were within 180 days of their release dates or were presumptively eligible for release. They further requested an order requiring the defendants to give the plaintiffs access to confidential communication with their counsel. The parties reached a confidential settlement agreement and after a conditional dismissal period, the case is now closed.
View Case Detail (JI-LA-0013)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 12, 2021
Alsaada v. City of Columbus
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-03431 (S.D. Ohio)
PN-OH-0010
Individual plaintiffs sued the city of Columbus, Ohio and multiple police officers after protesting the murder of George Floyd. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants violated their First and Fourth Amendment rights by using excessive force to infringe upon their freedom to assemble.
View Case Detail (PN-OH-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 11, 2021
Oglala Sioux Tribe v. Van Hunnik
Case Category: Child Welfare
Trial Docket: 5:13-cv-05020-JLV (D.S.D.)
CW-SD-0001
This is a class action lawsuit by Native American parents in Pennington County, South Dakota alleging that DSS, CPS, the State's Attorney, and the presiding judge of the state's Seventh Circuit court violated the ICWA and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiffs were originally granted injunctive and declaratory relief, but the Eighth Circuit vacated those orders and remanded the case. Following that decision, the defendants' motion to dismiss was granted, and judgment was entered in favor of the defendants.
View Case Detail (CW-SD-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 11, 2021
Newsome v. Philadelphia
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:19-cv-05590-MMB (E.D. Pa.)
EE-PA-0253
This is a case about the Philadelphia Police Department (PPD) failing to provide accommodations for nursing employees. On November 26, 2019, a female PPD employee filed this putative class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The plaintiff sued the City of Philadelphia under the Fair Labor Standards Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Represented by private counsel, the plaintiff sought injunctive and declaratory relief, damages, and attorneys' fees. The plaintiff claimed that the PPD had failed to provide nursing female police officers with appropriate accommodations, engaged in sex and pregnancy discrimination, and violated the First Amendment right to petition. On November 12, 2020, court granted a motion to dismiss for six of the eight counts, holding that the plaintiff did not have enough of a factual basis to allege claims of retaliation, a hostile work environment, or § 1983 disparate treatment. In addition, the First Amendment protection did not apply. The plaintiff filed an amended complaint on December 12, 2020, which the defendant has moved to dismiss. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (EE-PA-0253)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 11, 2021
Alaska Libertarian Party v. Fenumiai
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-00127 (D. Alaska)
VR-AK-0012
This action was filed 2020 Presidential Election cycle by the Alaska Libertarian Party against the Director of Elections in the District Court for the District of Alaska. The plaintiffs alleged that the signature requirements to gain access to the ballot violated their First and Fourteenth Amendment Rights. On July 13, 2020, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the case.
View Case Detail (VR-AK-0012)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 10, 2021
Weikert v. Elder
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-03646 (D. Colo.)
JC-CO-0012
In December 2020, six detainees in the El Paso County Jail in Colorado filed this putative class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. The plaintiffs alleged that the jail's lack of measures to mitigate the risks of COVID-19 amounted to a violation of the Due Process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment and cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The Court granted a stipulated preliminary injunction on January 4, 2021. The case is ongoing as of January 20, 2021.
View Case Detail (JC-CO-0012)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 10, 2021
Sadat v. Trump
Case Category: Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority
Trial Docket: 3:21-cv-00416 (N.D. Cal.)
PR-CA-0007
In 2021, the ACLU and private counsel brought this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in response to President Trump’s June 11, 2020 Executive Order authorizing economic sanctions against individuals who assist the International Criminal Court in investigating or prosecuting war crimes. The plaintiffs sued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and §706 of the Administrative Procedure Act. They sought declaratory relief and an injunction that would prevent the Trump Administration from implementing or enforcing the Executive Order. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PR-CA-0007)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 10, 2021
United States v. Daher
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 2:18-cr-20559-NGE-MKM (E.D. Mich.)
NS-MI-0006
This is a federal criminal case about SNAP fraud where the U.S. government moved to introduce evidence obtained using a FISA warrant. In 2018, the two defendants in this case were charged with multiple counts of wire fraud in connection with a scheme to defraud the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. One defendant pleaded guilty before filing any pretrial motions, but the other litigated the use of FISA evidence in a domestic criminal case. The court refused to dismiss the case due to the introduction of FISA evidence. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (NS-MI-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 9, 2021
Harper v. Cuomo
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 9:21-cv-00019 (N.D.N.Y.)
PC-NY-0081
This putative class action was filed on June 16, 2020 by medically vulnerable prisoners in New York's Adirondack Correctional Facility. The plaintiffs sought extra protections from COVID-19. A magistrate judge denied the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction on March 1, 2021.
View Case Detail (PC-NY-0081)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 9, 2021
Belton, Jr. v. East Baton Rouge Parish Prison
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-00278 (M.D. La.)
JC-LA-0030
Incarcerated persons in the East Baton Rouge Parish Prison filed this action in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, requesting the release of medically vulnerable inmates, as well as mitigation measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in the facility. The court denied to enter a temporary restraining order on July 3 and on February 4, 2021 the court granted the defendants' motions to dismiss.
View Case Detail (JC-LA-0030)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 8, 2021
Harper, et al. v. Cuomo, et al.
Relman Colfax PLLC
Date: Jan. 14, 2021
By: Relman Colfax PLLC
This lawsuit, brought pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), Rehabilitation Act (“RA”), and the Eighth Amendment, alleges that New York State and its prison officials violated the statutory and constitutional rights of elderly and medically-vulnerable incarcerated people ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
March 8, 2021
Brunson v. Board of Trustees of Clarendon County
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: 7210 (D.S.C.)
SD-SC-0005
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (SD-SC-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 7, 2021
Portland v. Barr
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-07184 (N.D. Cal.)
PN-CA-0051
On October 14, 2020, the cities of Portland, OR and Oakland, CA sued the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice alleging that the federal government violated the Administrative Procedure Act by setting federal law enforcement policy in excess of statutory authority and deploying federal law enforcement agents outside of their jurisdiction during "Operation Diligent Valor" in response to the 2020 racial justice protests. They further alleged that Chad Wolf was not legally authorized to perform the duties and functions of the Secretary of Homeland Security. Finally, the suit alleged that the federal government violated the Tenth Amendment by commandeering the Portland Police Bureau. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief. As of March 7, 2021, the case remains pending before the District Court.
View Case Detail (PN-CA-0051)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 5, 2021
EPIC v. ICE (Mobile Forensics)
Electronic Privacy Information Center
Date: Mar. 19, 2019
By: Electronic Privacy Information Center
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) searches mobile devices while carrying out law enforcement activities, potentially subjecting millions to searches inside its claimed enforcement authority 100 miles from the border into the interior. Over the last few years, ICE tested devices made ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
March 5, 2021
Electronic Privacy Information Center v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-00797-CKK (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0047
On April 9, 2018, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) filed this complaint against defendant U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). EPIC alleged that ICE had failed to timely respond to its FOIA request for records concerning "ICE’s purchase and use of mobile forensics devices and technology." EPIC sought injunctive relief under FOIA so as to have the responsive records released. ICE began producing documents in July 2018, and the parties continued to work out issues with the productions without court intervention through 2018 and 2019. In February 2020, the parties notified the court that they had resolved all outstanding issues with the document production. They then settled attorneys' fees and costs and stipulated to dismissal on June 23, 2020. This case is closed.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0047)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 5, 2021
Doe v. Johnson [later Kelly, Nielsen]
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 4:15-cv-00250-DCB (D. Ariz.)
IM-AZ-0021
On June 8, 2015, civil detainees confined in the Tucson Sector of the U.S. Border Patrol filed a class action lawsuit, alleging violations of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the APA due to inhumane and punitive conditions while they were detained in holding cells. The district court granted a PI mandating that defendants must maintain conditions of confinement adequate for the detainees' physical needs and provide detainees with mats and blankets after 12 hours. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the PI order. In 2018 the plaintiffs filed a motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of defendants' obligation to provide raised beds for detainees held for any period requiring sleep; the district court denied this motion. After a 7-day trial in January 2020, the district court held that these extended confinement conditions violated the Constitution and issued an order enjoining the defendants from holding detainees for longer than 48 unless they provided conditions of confinement that meet basic human needs. This permanent injunction was ordered and has been in effect since April 2020.
View Case Detail (IM-AZ-0021)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 5, 2021
National Immigrant Justice Center v. Executive Office for Immigration Review
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:21-cv-00056 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0094
In December 2020, the Trump Administration published a new rule, which would impose procedural barriers for individuals seeking asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). On January 8, 2021, four immigration legal service providers—the National Immigrant Justice Center, Immigrant Defenders Law Center, Florence Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project, and Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center—filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for District of Columbia. The plaintiffs sued the Executive Office for Immigration Review under the Administrative Procedure Act, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and the Fifth Amendment. The plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as attorneys' fees, claiming that the rule was issued without statutory authority, was contrary to the Immigration and Nationality Act, and violated the procedural due process rights of refugees. They also claimed that EOIR failed to undertake and publish a final regulatory flexibility analysis, as required under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. On January 14, 2021, the court granted a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction, and a stay of the rule's effective date. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0094)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 5, 2021
E.A.R.R. v. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-02146 (S.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0171
On November 2, 2020 asylum seekers with disabilities and health conditions filed a putative class-action suit against the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Customs and Border Protection in the Southern District of California. The plaintiffs alleged that defendant's violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. The plaintiffs requested a preliminary injunction and an order enjoining defendants from subjecting members of the putative class to removal protocols and attorney's fees. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0171)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 4, 2021
Disability Rights California v. County of Alameda
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-05256 (N.D. Cal.)
DR-CA-0061
On July 30, 2020, Disability Rights California brought a suit against Alameda County in the Northern District Court of California. Disability Rights California alleged that Alameda County had discriminated against residents with serious mental health disabilities by institutionalizing and segregating them instead of providing adequate treatment and services. On January 21, 2021, the Court granted Alameda County’s motion to dismiss with leave to amend and denied their motion to strike. Disability Rights California has filed an amended complaint as of February 23, 2021.
View Case Detail (DR-CA-0061)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 4, 2021
Romero v. Mount Prospect
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:00-cv-0861 (N.D. Ill.)
PN-IL-0024
This case is about racial profiling by police officers in Illinois. On February 11, 2000, three Hispanic motorists filed a complaint against the Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois (the Village), the Mount Prospect Police Department (MPPD), the Chief of Police, and several individual officers. The plaintiffs sought class certification. We don't have access to the filings and, as such, do not have any further information about the cause of action or specific allegations by the plaintiffs. The hearing on the final approval of the class action settlement was held on February 11, 2003. A judgment was entered granting the settlement, which terminated the case.
View Case Detail (PN-IL-0024)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 3, 2021
Clark v. City of New York
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-02334 (S.D.N.Y.)
PN-NY-0052
On March 16, 2018, the nonprofit Turning Point for Women and Families and individuals who were forced to remove their religious head coverings for post-arrest photographs while in the custody of the New York Police Department filed this class-action lawsuit in the Southern District of New York. The plaintiffs sued the City of New York under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), § 1983 for violations of plaintiffs’ right to freely exercise their religion under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and New York state law. The plaintiffs, represented by Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady LLP and the Council for American-Islamic Relations New York Inc., sought injunctive relief against the challenged policy, an order stipulating the adoption of non-discriminatory post-arrest photography policy, declaratory judgment, compensatory and punitive damages and attorney’s fees. On November 5, 2020, a settlement agreement was reached resolving the claim for injunctive relief. The monetary claims are still pending. The plaintiffs also asked the court to certify the class as all individuals who were forced to remove their religious head coverings for post-arrest photographs while in NYPD custody, this motion was granted on February 16, 2021.
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0052)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 3, 2021
Umarbaev v. Moore
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-01279 (N.D. Tex.)
IM-TX-0056
In May 2020, eleven immigration detainees at high risk for COVID-19 or who had already tested positive for COVID-19 filed this lawsuit, seeking writs of habeas corpus, declaratory, injunctive relief, and a temporary restraining order. They alleged that the conditions of their confinement violated their Fifth Amendment rights to due process. Judge Boyle denied the plaintiffs' request for release on June 6, 2020 and dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, stating that conditions of confinement claims could not be brought under habeas. The plaintiffs filed an appeal, but later voluntarily dismissed it and the case is now believed to be closed. The judge denied their request for temporary restraining order motion, indicating that habeas relief was limited to unlawful detention rather than confinement conditions. The plaintiffs then filed an interlocutory appeal to the Fifth Circuit Court in July 2020, which they moved to dismiss in January 2021. This case is believed to be closed.
View Case Detail (IM-TX-0056)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 3, 2021
Moreno v. Nielsen
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-01135 (E.D.N.Y.)
IM-NY-0062
On Feb. 22, 2018, four noncitizens, on behalf of a proposed class of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) recipients, filed this lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its component U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). Represented by the American Immigration Council and the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, the plaintiffs filed their complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, challenging the defendants' denial of their applications for lawful permanent resident (LPR) status.
View Case Detail (IM-NY-0062)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 1, 2021
Executive Order 13798—Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty
Administration of Donald J. Trump
Date: May 4, 2017
By: Donald J. Trump
It shall be the policy of the executive branch to vigorously enforce Federal law's robust protections for religious freedom. The Founders envisioned a Nation in which religious voices and views were integral to a vibrant public square, and in which religious people and institutions were free to ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
February 28, 2021
Disability Rights Montana v. Batista
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 2:15-cv-00022 (D. Mont.)
PC-MT-0010
On May 15, 2015, Disability Rights Montana filed a lawsuit against the Director of the Montana Department of Corrections and the warden of Montana State Prison. Both of these defendants were previous named as defendants in a separate complaint filed in Disability Rights Montana v. Opper (also available on the Clearinghouse). In the amended complaint, plaintiffs alleged that defendants had violated 8th Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishments by subjecting prisoners with serious mental illnesses to solitary confinement for months or even years at a time. The complaint was dismissed. Parties engaged in protracted settlements discussion through February 2018. On July 19, 2019, the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal and reassigned the case to Judge Molloy. The case remains open.
View Case Detail (PC-MT-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 28, 2021
Disability Rights Montana v. Opper
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 2:14-cv-00025-SEH (D. Mont.)
PC-MT-0008
Disability Rights Montana filed this lawsuit against the Montana Department of Corrections, the Montana State Prison, the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services, and the Montana State Hospital, in the United States District Court for the District of Montana. The plaintiff alleged that the Prison and the Department of Corrections were violating the Eighth Amendment rights of seriously mentally ill prisoners by, among other things, putting prisoners with serious mental illnesses in solitary confinement. As for the hospital and the DPHHS, the plaintiff alleged that both were violating the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Due Process rights of prisoners who had been sentenced as "guilty but mentally ill" (GBMI) by transferring them from the hospital to the state prison. This second claim was eventually dropped by the plaintiffs in a stipulated dismissal and the claims against the prison and the Department of Corrections were refiled under a different case number (available on the Clearinghouse under PC-MT-0010).
View Case Detail (PC-MT-0008)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
February 27, 2021
Immigrant Rights Groups File Class Action Suit Challenging Trump Administration’s “Muslim Ban”
American Immigration Council
Date: Mar. 17, 2017
By: American Immigration Council
In January 2017, the American Immigration Council, along with the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, and the National Immigration Project filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s first Muslim ban, implemented through an executive order, on grounds that it violates the Constitution� ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
February 27, 2021
Marimuthu v. Signal International, LLC
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-00499 (E.D. Tex.)
IM-TX-0039
On Aug. 7, 2013, 10 Indian guestworkers filed a lawsuit in E.D. Tx. for harm suffered as a result of an allegedly fraudulent and coercive employment recruitment scheme by Defendant Signal International. While discovery was underway, Signal filed for bankruptcy and the Court stayed this case pending bankruptcy and settlement proceedings. Defendant’s bankruptcy terminated February 9, 2019, but the parties continue to coordinate the distribution of the settlement funds.
View Case Detail (IM-TX-0039)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 27, 2021
Make the Road New York v. Pompeo
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:19-cv-11633 (S.D.N.Y.)
IM-NY-0070
In December 2019, individuals facing deportation, their United States citizen relatives, and nonprofit organizations that assist noncitizens sued various U.S. Departments alleging that Trump Administration immigration policies created a wealth test and excluded lawful immigrants from nonwhite countries, leading to the destruction of families, penalization of the use of benefits, and the diversion of resources. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief. They obtained a preliminary nationwide injunction on July 29, 2020. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-NY-0070)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 26, 2021
Shakman v. Democratic Organization of Cook County
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:69-cv-02145 (N.D. Ill.)
FA-IL-0008
In October 1969, plaintiffs, an independent candidate in the election for delegates to the 1970 Illinois Constitutional Convention and his supporters, filed a class action lawsuit against the Democratic Organization of Cook County, the City of Chicago, and various government officers at the state and local levels claiming that the extensive patronage system of Chicago politics violated their constitutional rights. Litigation was heavily complicated by procedural and standing issues, though it gave way to consent decrees prohibiting the patronage system. As of February 26, 2021, the State of Illinois has attempted to vacate the consent agreements, claiming that it is substantially compliant with the agreements' requirements.
View Case Detail (FA-IL-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 26, 2021
Committee on Oversight and Reform v. Barr
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:19-cv-03557 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0086
In 2019, the House Oversight and Reform Committee filed this lawsuit in the District Court for the District of Columbia against the Attorney General and Secretary of Commerce. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants were acting in violation of the Committee's Article I powers by refusing to comply with its subpoenas. These subpoenas were for documents related to the Committee's investigation into the Trump Administration's efforts to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census. The case has been stayed pending pending the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in Committee on the Judiciary of the United House of Representatives v. McGahn (1:19-cv-02379). The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0086)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 26, 2021
Singleton v. Cannizzaro
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 2:17-cv-10721 (E.D. La.)
CJ-LA-0010
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (CJ-LA-0010)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
February 24, 2021
Muslim Ban Litigation
Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law
Date: Feb. 3, 2020
By: Brennan Center for Justice
Less than a week after taking office, President Trump began the process of following through on his campaign promise of instituting a Muslim ban, triggering large-scale protests and chaos at airports around the country. Push back from the Courts led to the first ban being revoked, but two ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
February 24, 2021
Criminal Alien Program (CAP) FOIA Documents
American Immigration Council
Date: Jul. 15, 2014
By: American Immigration Council
American Immigration Council and AILA’s Connecticut chapter initially sought records related to CAP through a FOIA request to ICE in December 2011. When ICE refused to release records responsive to the request, Plaintiffs filed suit under FOIA for declaratory and injunctive relief to compel the ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
February 24, 2021
Criminal Alien Program (CAP)
American Immigration Council
Date: Jul. 31, 2013
By: American Immigration Council
Co-Plaintiffs American Immigration Council and AILA’s Connecticut chapter initially sought records related to the Criminal Alien Program (CAP) through a FOIA request to ICE in December 2011. When ICE refused to release responsive records, Plaintiffs filed suit under FOIA to compel their ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
February 24, 2021
Brennan Center for Justice v. U.S. Department of State
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-07520-JGK (S.D.N.Y.)
IM-NY-0056
On Oct. 2, 2017, the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law sued DOS under FOIA, seeking information about Trump's "extreme vetting practices" including the Administration's Mar. 6, 2017 EO and Sept. 24, 2017 Proclamation restricting entry of persons into the US. The Court granted partial summary judgment to the plaintiffs on March 29, 2019. It also ordered the defendants to provide the court with copies of five documents in question for in camera review on the applicability of the presidential communication privilege. The court continues to review the documents to determine and to what extent privilege applies. On July 30, 2020, the plaintiffs requested the court to act expeditiously and as soon as possible given the great public interest in the subject matter of the suit. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-NY-0056)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
February 23, 2021
Alvarez v. La Rose: Otay Mesa Detention Center
National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild
Date: Sep. 22, 2020
By: National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild
NIPNLG, the ACLU of San Diego, the ACLU, and Ropes & Gray, LLP filed a class-action lawsuit in the US District Court for the Southern District of California on behalf of all persons detained pretrial and post-conviction in US Marshals Service custody at the Otay Mesa Detention Center--a facility ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
February 23, 2021
Brizuela v. Feliciano
Yale Law School
Date: Nov. 14, 2017
By: Yale Law School
In February 2012 Sergio Brizuela, a resident of East Haven represented by the Yale Law School Worker and Immigrant Rights Advocacy Clinic, filed a proposed state-wide class action lawsuit against the Connecticut Department of Corrections (DOC) on behalf of all persons held by DOC based solely on ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
February 23, 2021
Ryan v. Smith
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-00843-SDD-SDJ (M.D. La.)
CJ-LA-0014
In December 2020, four individuals at East Baton Rouge Parish Prison (EBRPP) filed this class action lawsuit alleging violations of their Fourteenth and Sixth Amendment rights by judicial and prison officials. On December 15, the plaintiffs filed a motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. The request for a temporary restraining order was later withdrawn in January 2021. A settlement conference is scheduled for March 11 and the deadline for the parties to file a joint status report is March 21. The defendants' responsive pleading to the complaint is due on March 22, 2021. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (CJ-LA-0014)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 23, 2021
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
On August 3, 2020, the National Association for the Deaf and five deaf plaintiffs who use ASL as their primary language sued President Donald Trump and other White House officials for injunctive and declaratory relief. The plaintiffs alleged that the Defendants' failure to provide in-frame ASL interpretation at White House Coronavirus Briefings violated their rights under the Rehabilitation Act and the First Amendment. The plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction, which Judge James E. Boasberg granted on September 9, 2020. Under the preliminary injunction, the defendants are required to provide in-frame interpretation at all White House Coronavirus Briefings, either in the form of live ASL interpretation from the location of the briefing or live interpretation from a remote location in picture-in-picture format. The Defendants appealed the district court's order granting the preliminary injunction to the DC Circuit. The case is currently stayed in district court pending the resolution of the appeal.
View Case Detail (DR-DC-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 22, 2021
R.P.-K. v. Hawaii Department of Education
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 1:10-cv-00436-SOM-KSC (D. Haw.)
ED-HI-0003
In this class action suit, four students with disabilities and the Hawaii Disability Rights Center sued the Hawaii Department of Education for allegedly violating the IDEA, ADA, and the Rehabilitation Act. After seven years of litigation, Judge Oki Mollway approved the settlement for class members. Under the settlement agreement, the Department of Education agreed to pay $8.2 million dollars to class members, $1.5 million for attorneys' fees, and up to $250,000 for class counsel for future services. The administration of the settlement continues.
View Case Detail (ED-HI-0003)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
February 21, 2021
Wetzel v. Glen St. Andrew Living Community, LLC: Seventh Circuit Holds Landlords May Be Liable for Tenant-on-Tenant Discriminatory Harassment.
Harvard Law Review
Date: May 10, 2019
By: Harvard Law Review (Harvard Law School)
132 Harv. L. Rev. 2050
As federal civil rights statutes, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fair Housing Act of 1968 (FHA), and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 have much in common, but they diverge in one crucial respect. While employers and schools can be held liable for employee-on-employee and ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
February 21, 2021
Wetzel v. Glen St. Andrew Living Community
Lambda Legal
Date: August 27, 2018
By: Lambda Legal
In a groundbreaking decision, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a landlord may be held liable under the Fair Housing Act for failing to protect a tenant from known, discriminatory harassment at the hands of other tenants, reinstating Lambda Legal’s federal lawsuit on behalf of ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
February 21, 2021
Wetzel v. Glen St. Andrew Living Community, LLC
Case Category: Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Trial Docket: 1:16-cv-07598 (N.D. Ill.)
FH-IL-0019
On July 27th, 2016, plaintiff Marsha Wetzel brought a civil right action under the Fair Housing Act and the Illinois Human Rights Act in the Northern District Court of Illinois. Plaintiff, a 68-year-old lesbian, sought for declaratory, injunctive, and compensatory and punitive damages against Defendants Glen St. Andrew Living Community (GSALC) and their administrators. Plaintiff alleged that throughout most of her time at GSALC, Marsha has been subjected to a pattern of discrimination and harassment from other residents because of her sexual orientation, including persistent verbal harassment, threats and three separate assaults resulting in visible injuries. She further alleged that although she repeatedly complained about the sexual orientation-based harassment to GSALC staff, they gave no response. Instead, it was alleged that staffs marginalized and alienated Marsha and retaliated against her for complaining about the harassment.
View Case Detail (FH-IL-0019)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
February 20, 2021
Attorney General James Files Lawsuit Against the NYPD for Excessive Use of Force
New York State Attorney General
Date: Jan. 14, 2021
By: New York State Attorney General
New York Attorney General Letitia James today filed a lawsuit against the New York City Police Department (NYPD) and its leadership to end its pattern of using excessive force and making false arrests against New Yorkers during peaceful protests. In the complaint, Attorney General James outlines ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
February 20, 2021
City and County of San Francisco v. Sessions
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:17-cv-04642-WHO (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0093
The City and County of San Francisco sued DOJ on Aug. 11, 2017 over policies targeting "sanctuary cities" by imposing immigration enforcement conditions on federal funding for law enforcement. The U.S. District Ct. for the District of Northern California granted summary judgment for San Francisco, entering a nationwide injunction. DOJ appealed to the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court but limited the scope of the injunction to just California. The government filed a petition for review with the Supreme Court in November 2020. In January 2021, President Joesph Biden took office and the government filed a letter with the Supreme Court recommending it hold the petition in abeyance until it could determine the administration's position on these issues. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0093)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
February 19, 2021
Black Millennial Movement et al v Trump
ACLU Oregon
Date: 2021
By: ACLU Oregon
Protesters who were abducted, beaten, and gassed by federal agents in Portland, Oregon, are suing President Trump, the Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Marshals Service, DHS officials, and the federal agents that violated the protesters’ civil rights in a lawsuit filed today by the ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
February 19, 2021
People of New York v. New York
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:21-cv-00322 (S.D.N.Y.)
PN-NY-0054
New York Attorney General Letitia James filed this lawsuit against the NYPD on behalf of New York residents on January 14, 2021. The suit alleged that the NYPD regularly falsely arrested and used excessive force against peaceful protesters during the 2020 racial justice protests in violation of the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments. It also alleged violations of the New York State Constitution and state law, including instances of assault, battery, and false arrest and imprisonment by NYPD officers. The suit sought declaratory and injunctive relief requiring the NYPD cease unconstitutional policing practices and change its existing policies and training practices. As of March 7, 2021, the case is ongoing before the District Court.
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0054)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 19, 2021
Pettibone v. Trump
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-01464 (D. Or.)
PN-OR-0009
Individual Portland protestors along with Black Millennial Movement and Rose City Justice, Inc., filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. The plaintiffs alleged that federal law enforcement violated their First and Fourth Amendment rights to freedom of speech, freedom of peaceful assembly, and freedom from unreasonable search and seizure and acted outside of their statutory authority during “Operation Diligent Valor,” an alleged effort to quell the widespread racial justice protests in Portland in July 2020. As of February 19, 2021, the case remains pending in the District Court.
View Case Detail (PN-OR-0009)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 19, 2021
Gordon v. Jordan School District
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 2:17-cv-00677 (D. Utah)
ED-UT-0002
Parents of students across three Utah school districts allege sex discrimination because of disparities in opportunities between male and female athletics. Suing on behalf of a class of similarly situated parties, the parents seek injunctive relief and equal availability of sports like girls' football.
View Case Detail (ED-UT-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 18, 2021
Motion of Thomas C. Goldstein For Appointment As Amicus Curiae and For Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief [FISA Docket Misc. 18-04]
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: Misc. 18-04 (FISC)
NS-DC-0130
After then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions resigned on November 7, 2018, President Trump appointed Matthew Whitaker to serve as the Acting Attorney General under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998. On December 11, 2018, Thomas Goldstein filed this motion with the FISC for appointment as amicus curiae in order to urge the FISC to decide whether President Trump's appointment of Matthew Whitaker was lawful. On April 11, 2019, FISC Judge Rosemary M. Collyer denied Mr. Goldstein’s motion for appointment as amicus curiae. She found that the concerns raised by Mr. Goldstein were not before the FISC, because the Government had not relied on any action taken by Mr. Whitaker as the Acting Attorney General “in any submission to the Court.” She further noted that the Senate had confirmed the nomination of William P. Barr as Attorney General on February 14, 2019.
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0130)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 18, 2021
Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. v. Executive Office for Immigration Review
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-03812 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0093
In 2020, Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. and other immigration service organizations filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The plaintiffs alleged that a new rule promulgated by the Executive Office for Immigration Review, which set a new fee schedule for removal proceedings, violated the Administrative Procedure Act and the due process and equal protection rights of asylum seekers. In 2021, the court stayed the effective date of the final rule pending the outcome of the litigation. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0093)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 18, 2021
Chicagoans for an End to the Gang Database v. Chicago
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-04242 (N.D. Ill.)
PN-IL-0027
A coalition of individuals and community organizations filed a federal class action lawsuit against the City of Chicago and the Chicago Police Department in 2018 alleging that the city’s Gang Database was unconstitutional. The case was settled by the parties in 2020. Chicago announced a new process for designating individuals as gang members, among other initiatives.
View Case Detail (PN-IL-0027)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
February 16, 2021
Proclamation on the Termination Of Emergency With Respect To The Southern Border Of The United States And Redirection Of Funds Diverted To Border Wall Construction
WhiteHouse.org
Date: Jan. 20, 2021
By: Joseph Biden
Like every nation, the United States has a right and a duty to secure its borders and protect its people against threats. But building a massive wall that spans the entire southern border is not a serious policy solution. It is a waste of money that diverts attention from genuine threats to our ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
February 16, 2021
Sierra Club v. Trump
Case Category: Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority
Trial Docket: 4:20-cv-01494 (N.D. Cal.)
PR-CA-0006
Sierra Club and Southern Border Communities Coalition brought suit against the Trump administration over funds diverted towards the construction of the border wall project, after President Trump’s declaration of a national emergency in 2019. This suit is pending further updates following President Biden’s executive order terminating the national emergency concerning the southern border of the US and pausing the construction of the border wall.
View Case Detail (PR-CA-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 14, 2021
Richardson v. New York
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-09447-JPO (S.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0298
Current and former Black FDNY employees sued the City of New York alleging racial discrimination in their hiring, promotion, and compensation practices. Plaintiffs sought to represent a class of individuals similarly situated who suffered from FDNY's policies that afforded too much discretion to higher-level individuals and fostered a culture of favoritism that harmed Black candidates for hiring and advancement. The City filed a motion to dismiss and the Court partially granted the motion, but sustained the plaintiffs' claims related to the hiring and promotion practices with the FDNY. The City moved for partial summary judgment in May 2020, arguing that the retired class representatives could not seek relief. At the same time, the plaintiffs moved to certify the class. Both motions were pending as of February 11, 2021.
View Case Detail (EE-NY-0298)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 13, 2021
United States v. NYC Housing Authority, Davis v. NYC Housing Authority
Case Category: Public Housing
Trial Docket: 1:90-cv-628 (S.D.N.Y.)
PH-NY-0002
These are two cases about housing segregation in New York City. On January 31, 1990, two black and Hispanic individuals residing in or eligible for New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) housing filed a class action lawsuit against the NYCHA under the Fair Housing Act of 1968, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981-83. On July 1, 1992, the U.S. filed its own lawsuit against the NYCHA. The plaintiffs alleged that, since 1983, the Housing Authority discriminated on the basis of race, color, and national origin against black and Hispanic tenants in the selection and assignment of public housing. The court approved a consent decree on November 16, 1992, and this included creating a "Tenant Selection and Assignment Plan" to prohibit past practices. However, the court found some of the defendant's subsequent tenanting plans to be inconsistent with the consent decree, and issued a preliminary injunction on December 2, 1993. After a series of appeals and remands, the court turned the preliminary injunction into a permanent injunction on August 11, 1999. In addition to the permanent injunction, the court awarded monetary relief totaling $308,896.32 for attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses. This case has finished.
View Case Detail (PH-NY-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 12, 2021
Wolfe v. Portland
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-01882-BR (D. Or.)
PN-OR-0010
Four Portland residents with disabilities, along with the advocacy organization Disability Rights Oregon, filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. The plaintiffs alleged that local, state, and federal law enforcement violated their First, Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights as well as the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act by targeting protestors with disabilities and failing to make reasonable modifications to use of force policies. As of February 12, 2021, the case remains pending in the District Court.
View Case Detail (PN-OR-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 11, 2021
Turner v. U.S. Agency for Global Media
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-02885-BAH (D.D.C.)
FA-DC-0024
In 2020, former civil servants at the U.S. Agency for Global Media filed this complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The plaintiffs alleged that recently appointed administrators of the Agency were violating statutory firewalls in order to push the Trump Administration's agenda and viewpoint across the Agency's overseas broadcast networks. Judge Beryl A. Howell granted the plaintiffs' request for a preliminary injunction. This case is ongoing pending defendants' appeal of the preliminary injunction order.
View Case Detail (FA-DC-0024)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 10, 2021
Ramirez v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-00508-RC (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0078
In 2018, two immigrants who entered the U.S. as unaccompanied minors and were placed in ICE detention on their 18th birthdays filed this class action complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The plaintiffs alleged that ICE did not fulfill its statutory obligations when choosing whether to detain young them, in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act. in 2020, after a bench trial, the court sided with the plaintiffs and found that ICE systematically did not consider placing members of the plaintiffs' class in the least restrictive setting available. The parties are in the process of determining an appropriate remedy for ICE's violations of the law.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0078)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 10, 2021
Inland Empire Immigrant Youth Collective v. Duke
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 5:17-cv-02048 (C.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0105
In Oct. 2017, an immigrant rights' organization and an individual member sued DHS, USCIS, and CBP, seeking reinstatement of the member's terminated DACA status on the basis of an unsubstantiated criminal allegation, and nationwide class certification of people whose DACA status had been unlawfully revoked. The Court twice granted preliminary injunctions as well as class certification; defendants have appealed to the 9th Cir. The case was stayed pending resolution of Regents of University of California v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security by the Supreme Court. On June 18, 2020, the Supreme Court held that the DACA rescission was subject to judicial review under the APA and that the DHS secretary had offered insufficient justification to rescind the program. Following the Supreme Court's decision, the Ninth Circuit lifted the stay on the appeal of the preliminary injunction and directed the parties to file briefs addressing the impact of the Supreme Court's decision in Regents on this case. In early July 2020, the parties filed their briefs. As of February 10, 2021, this case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0105)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 10, 2021
NAACP, Boston Chapter v. Boston Housing Authority
Case Category: Public Housing
Trial Docket: 88-T-1155 (D. Mass.)
PH-MA-0002
This is a case about racially segregated public housing in Boston. In 1988, the Boston chapter of the NAACP filed this class action lawsuit in the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The plaintiff sued the Boston Housing Authority (BHA), the mayor of Boston, the Massachusetts Executive Office of Communities and Development, and HUD under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981-1983, 3604, 3608; and Massachusetts state law. They claimed that the BHA maintained racially segregated public housing by discouraging black applicants to apply to its site-specific waiting lists in the predominately white neighborhoods in Boston. The parties came to a settlement, which was approved by the court on October 4, 1989. The BHA agreed to integrate its white housing developments and pay damages. The payments would go into a Community Benefit Fund containing $250,000-$500,000 in order to promote fair housing efforts in Boston. This case has finished.
View Case Detail (PH-MA-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 9, 2021
Cottrell v. Kaysville City, Utah
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:91-cv-00095-DB (D. Utah)
JC-UT-0005
In 1991, a driver arrested for operating under the influence and strip searched at a county jail filed this § 1983 case in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah. The plaintiff alleged that local police and sheriff's deputies falsely arrested and illegally searched her, in violation of her constitutional rights. The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants but was reversed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in 1992 opinion. The parties reached a settlement in 1995, and case has been closed ever since.
View Case Detail (JC-UT-0005)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
February 7, 2021
Executive Order 14012: Restoring Faith in Our Legal Immigration Systems and Strengthening Integration and Inclusion Efforts for New Americans
Federal Register
Date: Feb. 5, 2021
By: President Joseph Biden (Office of the President)
This is a case about whether a 1990 arrest for driving under the influence and subsequent strip search were legal. The plaintiff, a woman who had been arrested on drunk driving charges, filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Utah on October 7, 1991. The case was ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
February 5, 2021
Lawsuit: Law enforcement fails to provide Oregonians with disabilities equal access to Portland demonstrations
CREEC
Date: Nov. 2, 2020
By: Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center
A lawsuit filed last night on behalf of people with disabilities in federal district court in Portland argues that law enforcement tactics fail to provide equal access to public demonstrations calling for racial justice, robbing them of their constitutional right to assemble and protest. People ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
February 5, 2021
Indigo Williams, et. al. v. Phil Bryant et. al.
Southern Poverty Law Center
Date: 2020
By: Southern Poverty Law Center
Mississippi has repeatedly violated a nearly 150-year-old, legally binding obligation to operate a “uniform system of free public schools” for all children, an obligation placed on the state as a condition of rejoining the Union after the Civil War. Mississippi enshrined this requirement in the ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
February 4, 2021
Grant Turner v. U.S. Agency for Global Media
Global Freedom of Expression
Date: 2021
By: Global Freedom of Expression
The United States (U.S.) District Court for the District of Columbia granted a motion for a preliminary injunction against the defendants in respect of actions taken by them within the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM) that likely violated the First Amendment. The case concerned six plaintiffs ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 27, 2021
Wis. Leg. v. Evers
Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Date: Sep. 1, 2020
By: COVID-Related Election Litigation Tracker
The Wisconsin state legislature filed this lawsuit against Tony Evers in his official capacity as the Governor of Wisconsin in the Wisconsin Supreme Court as an original action. Plaintiffs sought a temporary injunction against the governor's Executive Order suspending in-person voting from the ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 27, 2021
Taylor v. Milwaukee Elections Comm’n
Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Date: Sep. 1, 2020
By: COVID-Related Election Litigation Tracker
Washington state senator Lena Taylor, Tory Lowe (candidate for alderman in the City of Wilwaukee's 6th aldermanic district) and Justice Wisconsin Inc. (non-profit founded by Lowe) sued the Wilwaukee Election Commission and its members, seeking a temporary restraining order and preliminary ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 27, 2021
Swenson v. Bostelmann
Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Tracker
Date: Dec. 20, 2020
By: COVID-Related Election Litigation Tracker
Action by group of citizens alleging denial of right to vote in 4/7/20 Wisconsin Presidential Primary and Spring Election. Complaint seeks damages and injunctive and declaratory relief to establish reasonable, disability accessible, and constitutionally sufficient voting procedures (including mail ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 27, 2021
Jefferson v. Dane County
Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Date: Sep. 1, 2020
By: COVID-Related Election Litigation Tracker
Petitioners Mark Jefferson and the Republican Party of Wisconsin filed a petition and motion for temporary injunctive relief against respondents Dane County and Scott McDonell, in his official capacity as Dane County Clerk. Petitioners sought a temporary injunction ordering Mr. McDonell to remove a ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 27, 2021
Edwards v. Vos
Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Date: Dec. 20, 2020
By: COVID-Related Election Litigation Tracker
Class action by group of citizens alleging denial of right to vote in 4/7/20 Wisconsin Presidential Primary and Spring Election. Complaint seeks damages and injunctive and declaratory relief to establish reasonable, disability accessible, and constitutionally sufficient voting procedures (including ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 26, 2021
Debraska v. Oneida Business Comm.
Date: Dec. 20, 2020
By: COVID-Related Election Litigation Tracker
The Oneida Nation of Wisconsin Election Board canceled a May 23 primary election for tribal positions after passage of legislation allowing for this adjustment. Plaintiffs, candidates in the primary and Oneida Nation voters, seek a declaration that the legislation and subsequent cancellation of the ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 26, 2021
City of Green Bay v. Bostelmann
Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Date: Sep. 1, 2020
By: COVID-Related Election Litigation Tracker
After the Wisconsin Governor, Secretary-Designee, and Election Committee refused to postpone the April 2020 election, the City and Mayor of Green Bay sought declaratory and injunctive relief permitting them to delay the election to June 2020, extend the voter registration deadline, be relieved of ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 25, 2021
Common Cause R.I. v. Gorbea
Healthy Elections Project
Date: Nov. 19, 2020
By: Healthy Elections Project
Plaintiffs Common Cause Rhode Island (CC-RI), League of Women Voters of Rhode Island, and three Rhode Island registered voters sued Rhode Island Secretary of State and members of the Rohde Island Board of Elections, challenging the state's two witness/notary signature requirement of mail-in ballots ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 25, 2021
Washington v. Trump
Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Date: September 18, 2020
By: Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project (Stanford, Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Plaintiffs are WA, CO, CT, IL, MD, MI, MN, NV, NM, OR, RI, VT, WI, and VA suing Trump, DeJoy and the USPS. The complaint begins by laying out the historical importance of the post office and by describing the statutory requirements that the post office must satisfy in order to implement certain ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 25, 2021
Seventh Cong. Dist. Republican Comm. v. Va. Dep’t of Elections
Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Date: September 6, 2020
By: Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project (Stanford, Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
In Virginia, each qualified party decides for itself whether to use a primary or a convention to nominate for any particular partisan office. On April 15, a state trial court judge granted an injunction against the state law that says conventions must take place no later than June 9. The Seventh ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 25, 2021
Luciani v. Va. State Bd. of Elections
Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Date: November 5, 2020
By: Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project (Stanford, Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Independent candidate for House of Representatives brought a claim against the Virginia Department of Elections and State Board of Elections seeking declaratory judgment and injunctive relief pertaining to Virginia signature requirements to appear on ballot in light of hardship caused by COVID and ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 25, 2021
Libertarian Party v. Va. State Bd. of Elections
Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Date: September 1, 2020
By: Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project (Stanford, Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Third parties and their candidates for US House, Senate, and President sued the Virginia State Board of Elections to eliminate the petition signature requirement for the 2020 election due to COVID. After a one day bench trial on 7/13/20, the Court concluded that the signature requirements were ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 25, 2021
Lean on McLean v. Showalter
Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Date: November 19, 2020
By: Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project (Stanford, Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Tracy McLean, a candidate for Mayor of the City of Richmond, Virginia, sought to enjoin enforcement of certain procedures for appearing on the ballot in the November 2020 Richmond Mayoral Election on the grounds that such restrictions violated her First Amendment rights in light of the challenges ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 25, 2021
Gary v. Va. Dep’t of Elections
Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Date: November 19, 2020
By: Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project (Stanford, Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Plaintiffs--blind/visually-impaired registered voters, National Federation of the Blind of Virginia, and American Council of the Blind of Virginia, Inc.--sued Virginia Department of Elections ("VA DOE"), Virginia State Board of Elections, and officers of those organizations for violating the ADA by ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 25, 2021
Curtin v. Va. State Bd. of Elections
Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Date: September 7, 2020
By: Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project (Stanford, Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Plaintiffs allege absentee ballots increases voter fraud and thus violates the first and 14th Amendment, Art. I, section 4, cl. 1*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 25, 2021
Alliance Party v. Va. State Bd. of Elections
Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Date: September 1, 2020
By: Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project (Stanford, Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Third party and its candidate for president sued Virginia Board of Elections seeking to modify in-person signature collection requirements in light of COVID-19. Also seek to modify the requirement that electors for 3rd party candidates need to be named on the petition before signatures are ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 25, 2021
Alberto v. City of Roanoke
Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Date: October 22, 2020
By: Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project (Stanford, Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Two potential candidates allege that they cannot reasonably meet the State Board of Elections rules to appear on the ballot. Specifically, given COVID and relevant Stay at Home orders, limitations on gatherings over 10 people and social distancing: 1) they cannot reasonably obtain the required ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 24, 2021
Garbett v. Herbert
Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Date: November 19, 2020
By: Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project (Stanford, Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
After a request to modify the signature gathering requirements to permit electronic signatures, a candidate seeking the Republican party nomination for gubernatorial election brought action for declaratory and injunctive relief against Utah's Governor and Lieutenant Governor, asserting that state's ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 24, 2021
Texas v. Hollins
https://healthyelections-case-tracker.stanford.edu/detail?id=229
Date: Nov. 19, 2020
By: The Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Texas, through its Attorney General, seeks to prevent the Harris County Clerk from mailing applications for mail ballots to every registered voter in the counting. Texas claims that doing so will increase fraud and exceeds the clerk's statutory authority. Texas seeks a temporary restraining order, ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 24, 2021
Texas Alliance of Retired Americans v. Hughes
https://healthyelections-case-tracker.stanford.edu/detail?id=200
Date: Jan. 14, 2021
By: The Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Appellants renew their request to enjoin the implementation of HB 25, which would eliminate straight ticket voting (STV) in Texas as a violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Plaintiffs contend that the elimination of STV would disenfranchise minority voters because minority voters utilize ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 24, 2021
Semien v. Hughs
https://healthyelections-case-tracker.stanford.edu/detail?id=208
Date: Sep. 1, 2020
By: The Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Plaintiffs, Texas voters with disabilities and organizations that represent those individuals, bring claims under Title II of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 against the Texas Secretary of State for failing to provide them means of voting secretly and independently and ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 24, 2021
Mi Familia Vota v. Abbott
Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Date: October 22, 2020
By: Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project (Stanford, Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Plaintiffs Mi Familia Vota, Texas State Conference of NAACP, and individual registered voters sued Governor and Secretary of State of Texas for violating the First Amendment, the Equal Protection and Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Fifteenth Amendment, section 2 of the Voting ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 24, 2021
In re State of Texas
https://healthyelections-case-tracker.stanford.edu/detail?id=130
Date: Sep. 5, 2020
By: The Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
In Texas, voting by mail is only permitted if the voter qualifies under categories of (1) absence from county of residence, (2) disability, (3) over 65, (4) incarcerated, or (5) part of the address confidentiality program. Disability is defined as "sickness or physical condition that prevents the ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 24, 2021
In re Hotze
https://healthyelections-case-tracker.stanford.edu/detail?id=230
Date: Oct. 18, 2020
By: The Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
The issue in this case is whether Harris County Clerk Christopher Hollins (Respondent) is violating Texas Election Code § 84.012 by sending applications for mail-in ballots to over 2.37 million registered voters in Harris County regardless of whether the individual requested the application or has ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 24, 2021
Gloria v. Hughs
https://healthyelections-case-tracker.stanford.edu/detail?id=181
Date: Oct. 15, 2020
By: The Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Plaintiffs (a group of individual voters) sued the Texas Secretary of State claiming that denying the right to vote on account of age (by only making vote by mail without excuse available to for those at least 65 years old) violates the 26th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The complaint further ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 24, 2021
Gloria v. Hughs
https://healthyelections-case-tracker.stanford.edu/detail?id=132
Date: Oct. 15, 2020
By: The Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Plaintiffs (a group of individual voters) sued the Texas Secretary of State claiming that denying the right to vote on account of age (by only making vote by mail without excuse available to for those at least 65 years old) violates the 26th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The complaint further ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 24, 2021
Lichtenstein v. Hargett
https://healthyelections-case-tracker.stanford.edu/detail?id=223
Date: Oct. 22, 2020
By: The Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Tennesee law forbids anyone but employees of election commissions from providing absentee ballot applications to any person. The COVID pandemic is anticipated to increase the demand for absentee voting in Tennessee. Plaintiffs engage in voter outreach, including disseminating information about ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 23, 2021
Walker v. Barnett
https://healthyelections-case-tracker.stanford.edu/detail?id=178
Date: Oct. 15, 2020
By: The Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project
Plaintiff started circulating petition to be on ballot for US Senate, but because of Covid-19, social distancing recommendations, and lack of alternative ways to circulate the petition by the Secretary of State and unknown federal employyes, he files a pro se civil suit against the US, the unknown ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 23, 2021
Acosta v. Restrepo
Healthy Elections Project
Date: Sep. 10, 2020
By: Healthy Elections Project
Candidates for Rhode Island (RI) Senate sought injunctive relief from RI statutory ballot qualification requiring in-person solicitation and receipt of signatures, in-person witness, and wet signature of common petition form. Court granted injunctive relief for 2020 candidate nomination process ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 23, 2021
Arlene Ocasio v. Comisión Estatal de Elecciones
Healthy Elections Project
Date: Oct. 1, 2020
By: Healthy Elections Project
Although Puerto Rico's legislature expanded absentee and early voting eligibility for recent primaries and authorized expansions for the upcoming election, Puerto Rico's Comisión Estatal de Elecciones de Puerto Rico has not acted to allow senior citizens to vote early or absentee in November. The ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 22, 2021
Pennsylvania Democratic Party v. Boockvar
Healthy Elections Project
Date: Sep. 6, 2020
By: Healthy Elections Project
Petitioners request a declaratory and injunction relief so as to protect the franchise of absentee and mail-in voters. On October 31, 2019 the Governor enacted Act 77 which permits no excuse mail-in voting for all qualified electors. Due to COVID-19, Act 12 was passed. This Act allowed counties to ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 22, 2021
NAACP Penn. State Conference v. Boockvar
Healthy Elections Project
Date: Sep. 16, 2020
By: Healthy Elections Project
Plaintiff NAACP Pennsylvania State Conference sued Pennsylvania's Secretary of State and Director of the Bureau of Election Services and Notaries ("State Defendants"). It alleges that Pennsylvania's election laws and practices during the pandemic severely burden the right to vote and ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 20, 2021
Libertarian Party v. Wolf
Healthy Elections Project
Date: Sep. 5, 2020
By: Healthy Elections Project
Plaintiffs, three political parties and their supporters and potential candidates for office, sought a preliminary injunction enjoining the enforcement of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s in-person signature requirements for party candidates. Plaintiffs argued that given the extraordinary ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 20, 2021
League of Women Voters of Penn. v. Boockvar
Healthy Elections Project
Date: Sep. 16, 2020
By: Healthy Elections Project
Plaintiffs League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania, Urban League of Greater Pittsburgh, and individual voters sued state and county officials. Plaintiffs alleged that Pennsylvania’s failure to provide, on a uniform and statewide basis, absentee and mail-in voters with any opportunity to cure ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 19, 2021
Johnakin v. U.S. Postal Service
Healthy Elections Project
Date: Oct. 18, 2020
By: Healthy Elections Project
The USPS allegedly enacted operational challenges after June 2020 that reduced postal service worker hours, forbade overtime, and removed sorting machines, thus affecting the postal service's ability to deliver ballots cast by mail in a timely manner. Pennsylvania enacted a law to expand access to ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 19, 2021
In re: Extension of time for Absentee and Mail-in Ballots
Healthy Elections Project
Date: Sep. 5, 2020
By: Healthy Elections Project
Facts: The Montgomery County, PA Board of Elections filed an emergency petition to extend the date for the return of absentee and mail-in ballots (to align with the deadline for military and overseas ballots). The extension was requested because an update to the State Uniform Registry of Electors ( ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 19, 2021
In re: Extension of time for Absentee and Mail-in Ballots
Healthy Elections Project
Date: Dec. 20, 2020
By: Healthy Elections Project
Due to the high number of applications for mail-in and absentee ballots on account of the pandemic, despite its best efforts (including appropriating resources from other county agencies), the county board of elections was unable to process applications in a timely manner. The board feared that ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 18, 2021
Muting Gideon’s Trumpet: The Crisis in Indigent Criminal Defense in Texas
Prison Policy Initiative
Date: Sep. 22, 2000
By: Prison Policy Initiative
The Gideon case, while a landmark, merely extended the reasoning of Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932), which had earlier ruled that the Constitution required legal counsel be appointed or otherwise provided for indigents accused in capital cases. Later cases such as In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967 ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 18, 2021
ACLU Files Class Action Lawsuit Against Gov. and DOC for Failure to Protect Medically Vulnerable People in Prison from COVID-19
ACLU Colorado
Date: 2020
By: ACLU Colorado
ACLU of Colorado filed a class action lawsuit today against Governor Polis and the Department of Corrections seeking an emergency order to compel the DOC to protect medically vulnerable incarcerated people from COVID-19. The requested order includes prioritizing the release of people who are older, ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
January 18, 2021
Colorado DOC Population Management Plan - COVID-19
Colorado DOC
Date: Apr. 21, 2020
By: Colorado DOC
At the outbreak of COVID-19, the DOC quickly reviewed all relevant strategies and approaches to prevent the spread of the virus. These strategies mirror many of the public-facing strategies, but there are some profound challenges that are unique to the prison environment. *
View Link Detail