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
May 24, 2017
Heckman v. Williamson County
Case Category: Indigent Defense
Trial Docket: No. 06-453-C277 (State Court)
PD-TX-0001
A group of indigent defendants charged with misdemeanors punishable by imprisonment brought this suit alleging violations of their Sixth Amendment right to counsel. After six-year dispute regarding subject-matter jurisdiction, the parties reached a settlement forcing the county to provide notice of the right to indigent defense counsel, to provide public access to the courts, and to create a policy that provided quicker access to indigent defense counsel.
View Case Detail (PD-TX-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 24, 2017
Alford v. Johnson County Commissioners
Case Category: Indigent Defense
Trial Docket: 73D01-1601-PL-000003 (State Court)
PD-IN-0003
On October 8, 2015 individuals who were arrested in Johnson County brought this lawsuit alleging a systematic denial of counsel in violation of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments as well as state law. The case is in Indiana Superior Court and was brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law against the Johnson County Commissioners as well as several judges and public defenders. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss on March 29, 2016 and after hearing, Judge Robert W. Freese granted the motion to dismiss on January 30, 2017 because the plaintiffs' cases were not yet ripe for review as they were active criminal proceedings in the pre-trial stage. The plaintiffs appealed on February 6, 2017 and as of May 24, 2017 the matter is still pending.
View Case Detail (PD-IN-0003)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
May 24, 2017
Williamson County TX settles “no counsel court” lawsuit
http://sixthamendment.org/williamson-county-tx-settles-no-counsel-court-lawsuit/
Written: Jan. 24, 2013
By: Jon Mosher (sixthamendment.org)
Brief overview of the history of the case, Texas Law regarding sixth amendment rights, and the settlement agreement.*
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
May 23, 2017
Hurrell-Harring v. State of New York
Case Category: Indigent Defense
Trial Docket: 8866-07 (State Court)
PD-NY-0002
On November 8, 2007, 20 named criminal defendants with cases pending in New York state courts filed a class action lawsuit in the Supreme Court of the State of New York in Albany County. The plaintiffs sued the State under 42 U.S.C. §1983 for violations of the Sixth and the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and Article 1, Section 6 of the New York Constitution. The plaintiffs, represented by the New York Civil Liberties Union and private counsel, sought declaratory and injunctive relief to ensure meaningful and effective representation for indigent defendants.The parties settled in October 2014.
View Case Detail (PD-NY-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 22, 2017
Muslim Advocates v. United States Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-00813-TSC (D.D.C.)
NS-DC-0110
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0110)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 22, 2017
ACLU of Southern California v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 2:17-cv-02778-BRO-AS (C.D. Cal.)
NS-CA-0026
On April 12, 2017, the ACLUs of Southern California and Nevada filed this suit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). This was one of over a dozen such suits; each aimed to shed light on how U.S. Customs and Border Protection implemented President Trump's January 27 and March 6 Executive Orders that ban admission to the U.S. of nationals of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. Specifically, plaintiffs sought information "concerning CBP’s local implementation of President Trump’s January 27, 2017 Executive Order...as well as any other judicial order or executive directive issued regarding Executive Order No. 1, including President Trump’s March 6, 2017 Executive Order." The request concerned implementation at international airports within the purview of CBP's Los Angeles Field Office, including Los Angeles International Airport and McCarran International Airport. The request also concerned the number of individuals who were detained or subjected to secondary screening, extended questioning, enforcement examination, or consideration for a waiver at the aforementioned airports pursuant to the Executive Order. In the complaint, the plaintiffs argued that the requested records "would facilitate the public’s understanding of how Defendants implemented and enforced the Executive Orders in the Los Angeles Field Office" and that "[s]uch information is critical to the public’s ability to hold the government accountable." The case was assigned to Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell. On May 8, the government filed a motion to treat all of these FOIA cases as "multidistrict litigation" effectively consolidating them before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The ACLU's response is due May 30. For the transfer motion see this case. On May 17, the government moved to stay the proceedings pending the consolidation decision. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (NS-CA-0026)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 21, 2017
EEOC v. Associated Security Enforcement, Inc.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 4:04-cv-00391-SPM-AK (N.D. Fla.)
EE-FL-0017
In September 2004, the Miami District Office of the EEOC brought this suit against Associated Security Enforcement, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida alleging discrimination on the basis of sex in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. ...
View Case Detail (EE-FL-0017)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 21, 2017
Renee v. Duncan
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 4:07-cv-04299-PJH (N.D. Cal.)
ED-CA-0006
On August 21, 2007, a group of California students, their parents and a non-profit filed a lawsuit under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 701-06 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division for violating the teacher quality provisions of the federal No Child Left Behind Act. Specifically, the Plaintiffs alleged that by allowing teachers who were in the process of achieving full certification to teach full time, the Defendants violated the congressional directive that "highly qualified" teachers teach students in their core classes. The District Court granted Summary Judgment for the Defendants, holding under Chevron deference that the Defendants' interpretation of the No Child Left Behind Act was not unreasonable. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, however, reversed this decision on September 27, 2010, holding that the Defendants' policy was against the clear intent of Congress. On October 12, 2010 the Defendants filed a motion for rehearing en banc, however in December of 2010, the NCLB was amended to allow teachers who had not achieved full state certification to teach as "highly qualified" teachers. This amendment was only in effect through the 2012-2013 school year. The case was closed on July 5, 2012.
View Case Detail (ED-CA-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 18, 2017
Hassan v. City of New York
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 2:12-cv-03401-WJM-MF (D.N.J.)
PN-NJ-0006
Several individuals and organizations affiliated with New Jersey's Muslim community filed suit against the City of New York in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, alleging they had been subjected to illegal surveillance by the New York City Police Department solely because of their religion. The NYPD's monitoring, the plaintiffs claimed, violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by discriminating against them on the basis of their religion and contravened the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses of the First Amendment because, by singling out Muslims, it was not neutral with respect to religion or general applicability. The District Court granted Defendant's motion to dismiss, finding Plaintiffs lacked standing and nevertheless had pled insufficient facts to state a claim. On October 13, 2015, the Third Circuit reversed the District Court's judgment and the case remanded to the District Court for further proceeding.
View Case Detail (PN-NJ-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 17, 2017
ACLU of San Diego v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 3:17-cv-00733-L-JLB (S.D. Cal.)
NS-CA-0025
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (NS-CA-0025)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 17, 2017
ACLU of Virginia v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-00441-LMB-IDD (E.D. Va.)
NS-VA-0007
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (NS-VA-0007)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 16, 2017
Protect Democracy Project v. Office of Management and Budget
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-00814-APM (D.D.C.)
NS-DC-0112
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0112)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 16, 2017
CRIPA Investigation of the Westchester County Jail, Valhalla, New York
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: No Court Case (No Court)
JC-NY-0066
This DOJ investigation of the Westchester County Jail, under the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act began in 2007. In 2009, the investigation led to findings of unlawful jail conditions, such as inadequate medical and mental health care. The DOJ continues to assess information about current conditions at the jail.
View Case Detail (JC-NY-0066)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 16, 2017
CRIPA Investigation of the Topeka Correctional Facility, Topeka, Kansas
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: No Court Case (No Court)
PC-KS-0006
On April 7, 2011, the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division (“DOJ”) notified Kansas that it was opening an investigation into the conditions and practices at the Topeka Correctional Facility (“TCF”), a prison housing about 550 female prisoners. On September 6, 2012, the DOJ sent its “Findings Letter” to Kansas’ governor, informing him that TCF had failed to protect women prisoners from sexual abuse and harassment. On December 22, 2014 they released a Memorandum of Agreement requiring the state to implement specific procedures to address the sexual abuse.
View Case Detail (PC-KS-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 16, 2017
Protect Democracy Project v. Department of Justice
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-00815 (D.D.C.)
NS-DC-0111
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0111)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 16, 2017
United States v. Qazi
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 0:12-cr-60298 (S.D. Fla.)
NS-FL-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (NS-FL-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 15, 2017
CRIPA Investigation of the W.F. Green State Veterans’ Home in Bay Minette, Alabama
Case Category: Nursing Home Conditions
Trial Docket: (No Court)
NH-AL-0002
A DOJ CRIPA (42 U.S.C. § 1997) investigation into a Veterans' Nursing home in Alabama led to the discovery of conditions that were detrimental to resident health and restricted patient discharge into the community. A memorandum of understanding by the DOJ as well as preliminary remedies in a findings letter solved these problems.
View Case Detail (NH-AL-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 14, 2017
United States of America v. Philadelphia Municipal Separate School District
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: 1368(N) (S.D. Miss.)
SD-MS-0020
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (SD-MS-0020)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
May 13, 2017
International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, Fourth Circuit - Oral Argument Audio File - May 8, 2017
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Written: May. 8, 2017
By: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit)
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
May 11, 2017
Lambert v. Alexander County Housing Authority
Case Category: Public Housing
Trial Docket: 3:16-cv-513 (S.D. Ill.)
PH-IL-0002
In 2016, current and former public housing residents filed this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois. The plaintiffs alleged rampant discrimination on the basis of race and family status, rent overcharges, and a failure to maintain rental units. They seek monetary relief and an injunction to enjoin the Alexander County Housing Authority from discriminatory practices and to require adequate housing maintenance. As of May 11, 2017, the case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PH-IL-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 11, 2017
Concerned Pastors for Social Action v. Khouri
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 2:16-cv-10277-MAG-SDD (E.D. Mich.)
PB-MI-0011
In 2016, a nonprofit association of religious leaders in the Flint Area filed this suit in the Eastern District of Michigan. The plaintiffs sought injunctive relief to force the City of Flint and the State of Michigan to provide clean water for citizens plagued by the lead-laden water streaming through their service pipes. The plaintiffs alleged that the damage to their city's aquastructure was caused by the miserly penny-pinching of the City's Emergency Manager. In late 2016, the plaintiffs received a preliminary injunction that forced the defendants to provide bottled water deliveries to eligible recipients. In March of 2017, the parties reached a settlement agreement in which the State agreed to set aside $87 million to replace the damaged water pipes, among other remedies.
View Case Detail (PB-MI-0011)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 11, 2017
Mercado v. Dallas County, Texas
Case Category: Immigration
Trial Docket: 3:15-cv-03481-D (N.D. Tex.)
IM-TX-0043
On October 26, 2015, individuals held in detention by Dallas County filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The plaintiffs sued Dallas County and the Dallas County Sheriff under 42 USC §1983 for violations of the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, asked the court to enjoin the defendants from detaining plaintiffs solely based on a request from ICE, an immigration hold, or an Immigration Detainer. Judge Fitzwater initial granted the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint. The plaintiffs submitted an amendment complaint on July 5, 2016. The parties are now engaged in discovery.
View Case Detail (IM-TX-0043)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 10, 2017
United States v. Mohammad
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 3:15-CR-00358-JZ (N.D. Ohio)
NS-OH-0002
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (NS-OH-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 8, 2017
J.E.F.M. v. Holder [later Lynch, Sessions]
Case Category: Immigration
Trial Docket: 2:14-cv-01026 (W.D. Wash.)
IM-WA-0023
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-WA-0023)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
May 6, 2017
Desegregation Court Records
Written: Jan. 1, 2017
By: ProPublica (ProPublica)
This website contains desegregation documents related to the United States of America v. Halifax County Board of Education case.*
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
May 4, 2017
ACLU of Arizona v. United States Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 2:17-cv-01083-DMF (D. Ariz.)
NS-AZ-0001
On April 12, 2017, the ACLU of Arizona filed this suit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). This was one of over a dozen such suits; each aimed to shed light on how U.S. Customs and Border Protection implemented President Trump's January 27 and March 6 Executive Orders that ban admission to the U.S. of nationals of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. Specifically, plaintiffs sought information "concerning CBP’s local implementation of President Trump’s January 27, 2017 Executive Order...as well as any other judicial order or executive directive issued regarding the Executive Order," including President Trump’s March 6, 2017 Executive Order. The request concerned implementation at sites within the purview of CBP’s Tucson Field Office, including Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport. The request also concerned the number of individuals who were detained or subjected to secondary screening, extended questioning, enforcement examination, or consideration for a waiver at the aforementioned airports pursuant to the Executive Order. In the complaint, the plaintiffs argued that the requested records "would facilitate the public’s understanding of how Defendants implemented and enforced the Executive Orders" and that "[s]uch information is critical to the public’s ability to hold the government accountable." The case was assigned to Judge Deborah M. Fine. On May 8, the government filed a motion to treat all of these FOIA cases as "multidistrict litigation" effectively consolidating them before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The ACLU's response is due May 30. For the transfer motion see this case. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (NS-AZ-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
May 2, 2017
ACLU Foundation of Texas v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 4:17-cv-01128 (S.D. Tex.)
NS-TX-0004
On April 12, 2017, the ACLU Foundation of Texas filed this suit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). This was one of over a dozen such suits; each aimed to shed light on how U.S. Customs and Border Protection implemented President Trump's January 27 and March 6 Executive Orders that ban admission to the U.S. of nationals of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. Specifically, plaintiffs sought information "concerning CBP’s local implementation of President Trump’s January 27, 2017 Executive Order...as well as any other judicial order or executive directive issued regarding the Executive Order," including President Trump’s March 6, 2017 Executive Order. The request concerned implementation at international airports within the purview of CBP's Houston Field Office, including Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport and Bush Intercontinental Airport. The request also concerned the number of individuals who were detained or subjected to secondary screening, extended questioning, enforcement examination, or consideration for a waiver at the aforementioned airports pursuant to the Executive Order. In the complaint, the plaintiffs argued that the requested records "would facilitate the public’s understanding of how Defendants implemented and enforced the Executive Orders" and that "[s]uch information is critical to the public’s ability to hold the government accountable." The case was assigned to Judge Vanessa D. Gilmore. On May 8, the government filed a motion to treat all of these FOIA cases as "multidistrict litigation" effectively consolidating them before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The ACLU's response is due May 30. For the transfer motion see this case. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (NS-TX-0004)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 28, 2017
ACLU of Oregon v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 3:17-cv-00575-HZ (D. Or.)
NS-OR-0005
On April 12, 2017, the ACLUs Oregon, Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, and Wyoming filed this suit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).This was one of over a dozen such suits; each aimed to shed light on how U.S. Customs and Border Protection implemented President Trump's January 27 and March 6 Executive Orders that ban admission to the U.S. of nationals of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. Specifically, plaintiffs sought information "concerning CBP’s local implementation of President Trump’s January 27, 2017 Executive Order...as well as any other judicial order or executive directive issued regarding Executive Order No. 1, including President Trump’s March 6, 2017 Executive Order." The request concerned implementation at international airports within the purview of CBP's Portland Field Office, including Portland International Airport, Denver International Airport, Ted Stevens International Airport, Boise International Airport, and Casper/Natrona County International Airport. The request also concerned the number of individuals who were detained or subjected to secondary screening, extended questioning, enforcement examination, or consideration for a waiver at the aforementioned airports pursuant to the Executive Order. In the complaint, the plaintiffs argued that the requested records "would facilitate the public’s understanding of how Defendants implemented and enforced the Executive Orders" and that "[s]uch information is critical to the public’s ability to hold the government accountable." The case was assigned to Judge Marco A. Hernandez. On May 8, the government filed a motion to treat all of these FOIA cases as "multidistrict litigation" effectively consolidating them before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The ACLU's response is due May 30. For the transfer motion see this case. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (NS-OR-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 20, 2017
ACLU of Hawai'i v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 4:17-cv-01970 (N.D. Cal.)
NS-CA-0024
The ACLU's of Hawai'i, Northern California, and Utah filed a FOIA suit concerning the implementation of President Trump's January 27 and March 6 Executive Orders at international airports within the purview of CBP's San Francisco Field Office.
View Case Detail (NS-CA-0024)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 19, 2017
Texas v. United States
Case Category: Public Accomm./Contracting
Trial Docket: 7:16-cv-00054 (N.D. Tex.)
PA-TX-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PA-TX-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 19, 2017
Westefer v. Snyder
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 00-162-GPM (S.D. Ill.)
PC-IL-0023
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PC-IL-0023)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 18, 2017
ACLU of Georgia v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-01309-WSD (N.D. Ga.)
NS-GA-0001
On April 12, 2017, the ACLUs of Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and West Virginia filed this suit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). This was one of over a dozen such suits; each aimed to shed light on how U.S. Customs and Border Protection implemented President Trump's January 27 and March 6 Executive Orders that ban admission to the U.S. of nationals of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. Specifically, plaintiffs sought information "concerning CBP’s local implementation of President Trump’s January 27, 2017 Executive Order...as well as any other judicial order or executive directive issued regarding Executive Order No. 1, including President Trump’s March 6, 2017 Executive Order." The request concerned implementation at international airports within the purview of CBP's College Park Field Office, including Hartsfield/Jackson International Airport, Charlotte Douglas International Airport, Charleston International Airport, and Yeager International Airport. The request also concerned the number of individuals who were detained or subjected to secondary screening, extended questioning, enforcement examination, or consideration for a waiver at the aforementioned airports pursuant to the Executive Order. In the complaint, the plaintiffs argued that the requested records "would facilitate the public’s understanding of how Defendants implemented and enforced the Executive Orders" and that "[s]uch information is critical to the public’s ability to hold the government accountable." The case was assigned to Judge Richard W. Story. On May 8, the government filed a motion to treat all of these FOIA cases as "multidistrict litigation" effectively consolidating them before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The ACLU's response is due May 30. For the transfer motion see this case. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (NS-GA-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 17, 2017
ACLU of Florida v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-21382-DPG (S.D. Fla.)
NS-FL-0002
On April 12, 2017, the ACLU of Florida filed this suit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). This was one of over a dozen such suits; each aimed to shed light on how U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) implemented President Trump's January 27 and March 6 Executive Orders that ban admission to the U.S. of nationals of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. Specifically, plaintiffs sought information "concerning CBP’s local implementation of President Trump’s January 27, 2017 Executive Order...as well as any other judicial order or executive directive issued regarding Executive Order No. 1, including President Trump’s March 6, 2017 Executive Order." The request concerned implementation at CBP’s Miami Field Office (including Miami International Airport and various ports of entry) and CBP’s Tampa Field Office (including Orlando International Airport and various ports of entry). In the complaint, the plaintiffs argued that the requested records "would facilitate the public’s understanding" of how Defendants implemented and enforced the Executive Orders through the Miami and Tampa Field Offices, and that "[s]uch information is critical to the public’s ability to hold the government accountable." Plaintiffs noted that the Miami and Orlando airports are especially busy hubs for international passengers, and that a direct flight route runs from Dubai to Orlando. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (NS-FL-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 17, 2017
ACLU of Illinois, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-02768 (N.D. Ill.)
NS-IL-0004
On April 12, 2017, the ACLUs of Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin filed this suit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). This was one of over a dozen such suits; each aimed to shed light on how U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) implemented President Trump's January 27 and March 6 Executive Orders that ban admission to the U.S. of nationals of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. Specifically, plaintiffs sought information "concerning CBP’s local implementation of President Trump’s January 27, 2017 Executive Order...as well as any other judicial order or executive directive issued regarding Executive Order No. 1, including President Trump’s March 6, 2017 Executive Order." The request concerned implementation at CBP’s Chicago Field Office, including Chicago's O'Hare International Airport, and other international airports and ports of entry across the Midwestern states in which plaintiffs were located. In the complaint, the plaintiffs argued that the requested records "would facilitate the public’s understanding" of how Defendants implemented and enforced the Executive Orders through the Chicago Field Office, in particular at O'Hare Airport, and that "[s]uch information is critical to the public’s ability to hold the government accountable." Plaintiffs argued that CBP detained approximately 17 persons at O'Hare on Jan. 28 under Executive Order No. 1, and refused to release information about the detainees, even to their lawyers. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (NS-IL-0004)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 17, 2017
ACLU of Maine v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 2:17-cv-00132-GZS (D. Me.)
NS-ME-0001
On April 12, 2017, the ACLUs of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island filed this suit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). This was one of over a dozen such suits; each aimed to shed light on how U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) implemented President Trump's January 27 and March 6 Executive Orders that ban admission to the U.S. of nationals of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. Specifically, plaintiffs sought information "concerning CBP’s local implementation of President Trump’s January 27, 2017 Executive Order...as well as any other judicial order or executive directive issued regarding Executive Order No. 1, including President Trump’s March 6, 2017 Executive Order." The request concerned implementation at CBP's Boston Field Office, including Boston's Logan International Airport and other smaller international airports and ports of entry throughout New England. In the complaint, the plaintiffs argued that the requested records "would facilitate the public’s understanding" of how Defendants implemented and enforced the Executive Orders through CBP's Boston Field Office, and that "[s]uch information is critical to the public’s ability to hold the government accountable." Plaintiffs argued that "[a]t Boston’s Logan International Airport, implementation of the order harmed both individuals and institutions. Scholars and academics from Boston-area institutions were denied entry into the United States. Doctors from New England hospitals and patients seeking medical care were delayed, denied entry, or subjected to unnecessary anguish." The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (NS-ME-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 13, 2017
ACLU of Michigan v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 5:17-cv-11149-JEL-EAS (E.D. Mich.)
NS-MI-0005
On April 12, 2017, the ACLU of Michigan filed this suit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). This was one of over a dozen such suits; each aimed to shed light on how U.S. Customs and Border Protection implemented President Trump's January 27 and March 6 Executive Orders that ban admission to the U.S. of nationals of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. Specifically, plaintiffs sought information "concerning CBP’s local implementation of President Trump’s January 27, 2017 Executive Order...as well as any other judicial order or executive directive issued regarding Executive Order No. 1, including President Trump’s March 6, 2017 Executive Order." The request concerned implementation at international airports within the purview of CBP's Detroit Field Office. The request also concerned the number of individuals who were detained or subjected to secondary screening, extended questioning, enforcement examination, or consideration for a waiver at the aforementioned airports pursuant to the Executive Order. In the complaint, the plaintiffs argued that the requested records "would facilitate the public’s understanding of how Defendants implemented and enforced the Executive Orders through the Detroit Field Office" and that "[s]uch information is critical to the public’s ability to hold the government accountable." The complaint stated that "Michigan residents were among those most severely impacted by the Executive Orders...Of the major metropolitan areas in the United States, Detroit has the highest number of residents per capita from the seven countries barred under Executive Order No. 1." On May 8, the government filed a motion to treat all of these FOIA cases as "multidistrict litigation" effectively consolidating them before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The ACLU's response is due May 30. For the transfer motion see this case. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (NS-MI-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 13, 2017
Melendres v. Arpaio
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 2:07-cv-02513-GMS (D. Ariz.)
PN-AZ-0003
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PN-AZ-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 13, 2017
CRIPA Investigation, Alabama men's prisons
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: (No Court)
PC-AL-0037
On October 6, 2016, the DOJ announced that it had opened a statewide investigation into the conditions in Alabama’s prisons for men. The investigation will be conducted under CRIPA. As of April 13, 2017, the investigation is not listed on the Special Litigation Section’s Cases and Matters webpage. It is unclear whether the investigation commenced and whether it is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PC-AL-0037)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 12, 2017
DOJ Investigation of the Orange County District Attorney’s Office and Sheriff’s Department
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: (No Court)
PN-CA-0040
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PN-CA-0040)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 12, 2017
DOJ Investigation of Georgia Department of Corrections re: LGBT Treatment
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: (No Court)
PC-GA-0019
On February 5, 2016, the DOJ notified the Attorney General of Georgia of its investigation into the treatment of transgender and gay prisoners in the custody of the Georgia Department of Corrections.
View Case Detail (PC-GA-0019)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 12, 2017
Ball v. Kasich
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 2:16-cv-282 (S.D. Ohio)
PB-OH-0008
On March 31, 2016, individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities filed a class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio against the State and State departments. They claimed that they were experiencing, or were at risk of experiencing, pervasive and widespread isolation and segregation in violation of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Supreme Court’s decision in Olmstead v. L.C., and the Social Security Act. On March 23, 2017, the court denied the defendants' motions to dismiss the case. On March 27, 2017, the court granted class certification, but the defendants subsequently asked for reconsideration, so, as of April 12, 2017, the class certification issue is still open.
View Case Detail (PB-OH-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 10, 2017
Tomlinson v. El Paso Corp.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 04-cv-02686-WDM-MEH (D. Colo.)
EE-CO-0063
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (EE-CO-0063)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 10, 2017
Kress v. CCA of Tennessee
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:08-cv-00431-LJM-DML (S.D. Ind.)
JC-IN-0019
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (JC-IN-0019)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 10, 2017
Pinzon v. Lane
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 87 C 4542 (N.D. Ill.)
CJ-IL-0010
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (CJ-IL-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 10, 2017
Willard v. Snyder
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 1:01-cv-01884 (N.D. Ill.)
CJ-IL-0008
On March 16, 2001, plaintiffs on parole in Cook County, Illinois filed this action in the Northern District of Illinois suing the Illinois Department of Corrections under state law and 42 U.S.C. §1983 alleging violations of their constitutional right to due process. Plaintiffs were allegedly denied their constitutional right to prompt preliminary parole revocation hearings nearby the site of their arrest and were instead transferred hundreds of miles from Cook County and forced to waits months, all according to Department policy. In a stipulated dismissal, the Illinois Department of Corrections changed their policies with regard to parolees arrested for technical violations to be more reflective of those parolees' constitutional rights.
View Case Detail (CJ-IL-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 9, 2017
American Immigration Council v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration
Trial Docket: 1:11-cv-01972 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0018
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0018)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 9, 2017
Lewis v. City of Chicago
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:98-CV-05596 (N.D. Ill.)
EE-IL-0268
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (EE-IL-0268)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 9, 2017
United States v. Alabama
Case Category: Immigration
Trial Docket: 2:11-cv-2746 (N.D. Ala.)
IM-AL-0005
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-AL-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 8, 2017
30 Related School Desegregation Cases in the Southern District of Mississippi
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: (S.D. Miss.)
SD-MS-0035
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (SD-MS-0035)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 8, 2017
Brandon A. v. Donahue
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:00-cv-00025 (D.N.H.)
EE-NH-0010
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (EE-NH-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 8, 2017
United States of America v. Morehouse Parish School Board
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: 3:69-cv-14429-RGJ-KLH (W.D. La.)
SD-LA-0019
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (SD-LA-0019)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 7, 2017
DOJ Investigation of the St. Louis County Family Court
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: (No Court)
CJ-MO-0019
The St. Louis County Family Court and the U.S. Department of Justice reached an agreement to resolve allegations of violations of due process and equal protection rights by the court. The agreement required the court to address racial disparities among youth during the juvenile justice process.
View Case Detail (CJ-MO-0019)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 6, 2017
DOJ Investigation of Lorain Police Department
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: (No Court)
PN-OH-0009
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PN-OH-0009)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 6, 2017
Handschu v. Special Services Division
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:71-cv-02203-CSH-SCS (S.D.N.Y.)
PN-NY-0007
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0007)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 5, 2017
DOJ Investigation of Riverside Police Department
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: (No Court)
PN-CA-0037
After the fatal police shooting of a black teenager on December 28, 1998, the Department of Justice launched a civil investigation into the Riverside Police Department's use of force and treatment of minorities. It took the Riverside Police Department five years to satisfy all the requirements of the findings.
View Case Detail (PN-CA-0037)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 4, 2017
Marie O. v. Edgar
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 94-ED-1471 (N.D. Ill.)
ED-IL-0003
Four families of children with disabilities filed a class-action lawsuit in federal court in Chicago against the Governor, seeking to force the state to meet Congress' mandate to provide early intervention services. The court granted the plaintiffs the requested declaratory relief as well as injunctive relief. The defendants appealed, but the Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision.
View Case Detail (ED-IL-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 3, 2017
Doe v. Oak Park
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 94-ED-6449 (N.D. Ill.)
ED-IL-0002
The court found that the School properly found the plaintiff's misconduct was not related to his learning disability after the plaintiff filed a complaint asserting the his expulsion violated his due process rights.
View Case Detail (ED-IL-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 2, 2017
United States v. Covington County School District
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: 2:66-cv-02148-KS (S.D. Miss.)
SD-MS-0008
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (SD-MS-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 2, 2017
Knight First Amendment Institute v. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-00548 (D.D.C.)
NS-DC-0108
On Mar. 27, 2017, the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Plaintiff sued the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its component Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Plaintiff alleged that defendants had violated the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), and requested injunctive relief. Plaintiff alleges that that DHS' component Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has since 2009 been authorized to conducts searches of individuals' electronic devices at the US borders, without individualized suspicion, and to detain indefinitely these devices. To learn more about CBP's activity, plaintiff filed FOIA request with DHS, CBP, and ICE, for records detailing the government's searches since 2012. Plaintiff made these requests on Mar. 15, 2017 and requested expedited processing. Plaintiff argued the topic was of urgent public interest, given the increase in border searches since early 2017, and reports of some CBP officers coercing travelers into surrendering their devices. As of the filing of the Mar. 27 complaint, none of the agencies had communicated any decision on the FOIA requests, thus failing to meet their 10-day statutory deadline to do so. Because no administrative remedies exist, plaintiff is now suing for an injunction.
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0108)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 2, 2017
In re Search of an Apple iPhone Seized During the Execution of a Search Warrant on a Black Lexus IS300, California License Plate 35KGD203
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 5:16-cm-00010-SP (C.D. Cal.)
NS-CA-0022
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (NS-CA-0022)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 2, 2017
Currier v. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 3:17-cv-01799 (N.D. Cal.)
NS-CA-0023
Plaintiff Cora Currier, an employee of First Look Media Works and staff reporter for The Intercept, sued the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of State, and the Department of Justice under the Freedom of Information Act. Specifically, the plaintiff sought disclosure of records concerning the development and implementation of travel restrictions barring nationals of several Muslim-majority countries from entering the U.S. pursuant to President Trump's Jan. 27 Executive Order.
View Case Detail (NS-CA-0023)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 1, 2017
A.B. v. Washington Department of Social and Health Services
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 2:14-cv-01178-MJP (W.D. Wash.)
JC-WA-0011
In 2014, advocates for a class of legally incompetent criminal defendants in Washington filed suit against the Washington Department of Social and Health Services seeking both injunctive and declaratory relief for the cruel and unusual punishment, violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and violation of due process rights that stem from prolonged in-jail detention prior to transfer to a mental health facility. After a bench trial, the court issued a permanent injunction requiring the provision of competency services within seven days. The defendants appealed the injunction. During the litigation, the court considered restraining orders due to safety issues at two facilities - the safety issues were later resolved. On July 7, 2016, the court issued an order of civil contempt. The court imposed monetary sanctions on the defendants, to be continued until the defendants complied by providing timely services. As for the issue on appeal, the parties reached a settlement - the parties await approval of the settlement by the district court. As of March 30, 2017, the case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (JC-WA-0011)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 1, 2017
Crisman v. Department of Justice
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:12-cv-1871 (D.D.C.)
NS-DC-0091
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0091)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 1, 2017
City of Seattle v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration
Trial Docket: 2:17-cv-00497-BAT (W.D. Wash.)
IM-WA-0033
The City of Seattle commenced this lawsuit on March 29, 2017 to challenge President Trump's January 25, 2017 Executive Order (No. 13,768). The EO denies federal funding to "sanctuary cities," or cities that resist enforcing the President's immigration policies. On Mar. 29, Seattle filed a complain in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington seeking declaratory relief. According to the complaint, Seattle decided "that their law enforcement personnel and other employees should not inquire into the immigration status of any person unless specifically required to do so by law or court order" so as to encourage immigrants "to cooperate with law enforcement personnel in preventing and solving crime, and to seek health assistance when necessary." To be designated as a "sanctuary jurisdiction," the city would have to violate 8 U.S.C. 1373, which states that "a Federal, State, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual." If, as provided for by the EO, the federal government were to designate Seattle a "sanctuary jurisdiction," the effect on Seattle would be "devastating" and would be "denying it significant funding that it uses for such essential purposes as home care for the disabled elderly and nutrition assistance for needy children." Accordingly, Seattle requests that the Court declare it to be in compliance with 8 U.S.C. 1373. Seattle further seeks declaration that the EO violates the Tenth Amendment and the Spending Clause. The case was assigned to Judge Brian A. Tsuchida. It is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-WA-0033)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 31, 2017
Perez-Farias v. Global Horizons, Inc.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:05-cv-3061 (E.D. Wash.)
EE-WA-0118
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (EE-WA-0118)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 31, 2017
Emma C. v. Eastin
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 3:96-cv-04179-TEH (N.D. Cal.)
ED-CA-0001
This Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ("IDEA") class action case was filed on November 18, 1996, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against a local school district which failed to provide a free appropriate public education to children with disabilities. The lawsuit prompted a state investigation into the allegations, which resulted in the implementation of a Corrective Action Plan. The Court ordered the school district and the state department of education to pay attorneys fees and is closely monitoring the school district's progress in its compliance with the corrective action plan. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (ED-CA-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 31, 2017
American Civil Liberties Union v. Department of Justice / Electronic Privacy Information Center v. Department of Justice
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:06-cv-00214-RCL (D.D.C.)
NS-DC-0096
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0096)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 31, 2017
ACLU v. NSA
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-09198-AT (S.D.N.Y.)
NS-NY-0011
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (NS-NY-0011)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 31, 2017
Johnson v. Jackson Parish School Board
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: 3:65-cv-11130-RGJ-KLH (W.D. La.)
SD-LA-0012
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (SD-LA-0012)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 30, 2017
Rasho v. Walker
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:07-CV-1298-HAB-JAG (C.D. Ill.)
PC-IL-0031
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PC-IL-0031)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 30, 2017
In re Application of the Federal Bureau of Investigation for an Order Requiring the Production of Tangible Things from [redacted]
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: BR 15-99 (FISC)
NS-DC-0101
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0101)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 30, 2017
Gomez v. Vernon
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 91-299 (D. Idaho)
PC-ID-0003
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PC-ID-0003)


CASE STUDIES
March 29, 2017
"Flint’s Lead Pipes Will Be Replaced Under Settlement in Federal Safe Drinking Water Case"
https://www.nrdc.org/media/2017/170328
Written: Mar. 28, 2017
(The Natural Resources Defense Council )
Citizen suit brings funding and timeline for pipe replacement, more water quality testing, transparency, and other resources to help Flint.*
View Case Study Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
March 29, 2017
Cohen v. Brown University
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: Civ. A. No. 92-0197 (D.R.I.)
ED-RI-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (ED-RI-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 27, 2017
Maryland Restorative Justice Initiative et al v. Hogan et al
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 1:16-cv-1021 (D. Md.)
CJ-MD-0004
The Maryland Restorative Justice Initiative, a non-profit organization dedicated to fighting for prisoners' rights, and three inmates who, as juveniles, were sentenced to life in prison, filed a § 1983 suit against Governor Hogan and officials from the Department of Corrections, alleging that Maryland's parole system violated the Eighth Amendment by providing no meaningful opportunity for parole for juvenile lifers.
View Case Detail (CJ-MD-0004)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 27, 2017
Hart v. Colvin
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 3:15-cv-00623-JST (N.D. Cal.)
PB-CA-0046
On February 9, 2015, three individuals whose disability benefits had allegedly been denied or terminated based on consultative examinations (CEs) performed by a now disqualified doctor, filed this class action lawsuit in the District Court for the Northern District of California. The plaintiffs sued the Acting Commissioner of Social Security in her official capacity, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that she wrongfully relied on CEs performed by a physician, who at the time of this complaint had been disqualified, in denying or terminating their disability benefits. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that the defendant's policy and practice of relying on this disqualified doctor's defective CE reports in denying or terminating disability benefits was in violation of requirement that these determinations be based on evidence from acceptable medical sources. After the defendant's motion to dismiss was denied on July 17, 2015, the court set a number of settlement conferences. For months these conferences were unsuccessful, but the parties reached an agreement on September 19, 2016 by which the defendant agreed to provide relief to class members through procedural mechanisms that vary depending on the status of their claims and the amount of time since their examination by the disqualified doctor and pay $490,000 in attorneys fees. The parties' motion for preliminary approval of this settlement agreement was granted by Judge Tigar on November 9, 2016. Implementation is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PB-CA-0046)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 27, 2017
United States v. South Carolina
Case Category: Immigration
Trial Docket: 2:11-cv-02958 (D.S.C.)
IM-SC-0002
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-SC-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 27, 2017
Trowbridge v. Cuomo
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 1:16-cv-03455 (S.D.N.Y.)
CJ-NY-0012
In May 2016, individuals who were arrested in the Bronx for misdemeanors filed a class action complaint in the S.D.N.Y. against the New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and the administrators of New York State's Unified Court System for Bronx Criminal Court's failure to provide the constitutionally guaranteed rights to a speedy trial and due process per Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and a state law that requires a speedy trial timetable. Plaintiffs further alleged that Bronx Criminal Court had inordinate delays compared to other boroughs and sought a declaratory and equitable relief. The case was assigned to Judge George B. Daniels and the Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein. In December 2016, following defendants' motion to dismiss, the court removed Governor Cuomo as a defendant and allowed the plaintiffs to file an amended complaint because the plaintiffs had an adequate standing. In January 2017, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint and the case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (CJ-NY-0012)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 27, 2017
Center for Independent Living v. Wal-Mart Stores
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 3:12-cv-03885-CRB (N.D. Cal.)
DR-CA-0038
On July 25, 2012, the Center for Independent Living, a non-profit disability advocacy and support organization, and several named individual plaintiffs with disabilities necessitating the use of wheelchairs or scooters filed a class-action law suit in Federal Court, against Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. The Plaintiffs alleged that Wal-Mart's refusal to provide wheelchair-accessible point-of-sale (POS) terminals at its many of its California stores, when accessible alternatives were readily available, was illegal discrimination against people with disabilities, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and State law. On June 18, 2013 the parties began settlement negotiations. On January 23, 2017, Judge Breyer entered an order dismissing the case and retaining jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement. The agreement required specified Wal-Mart locations to install certain Point of Sale devices accesible to individuals with disabilities.
View Case Detail (DR-CA-0038)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 27, 2017
Universal Muslim Association of America v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-00537 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0027
On March 24, 2017, the Universal Muslim Association of America and two individual Yemenis filed this lawsuit against President Donald Trump in a challenge to his March 6, 2017 Executive Order 13,780. The complaint seeks declaratory and injunctive relief, arguing that Executive Order subjects the plaintiffs and all Muslims residing in the U.S. to "hostile treatment under the law and...stigma upon them based on their religious affiliation." The complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Additionally, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in conjunction with the complaint. Specifically, the complaint argues that the EO discriminates on the basis of religion and national origin. As such, it violates the First Amendment Establishment Clause and Fifth Amendment Equal Protection. The UMAA further argues that the EO also violates the First Amendment Free Speech clause, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act. The Universal Muslim Association of America is (UMAA) is a nonprofit organization whose membership constitutes the largest organization of Shi'a Muslims in the U.S. UMAA seeks to build mutual understanding between Shi'a Muslims and their fellow Americans, while encouraging its members to be active in their communities. The EO prevents the organization from conducting its activities. Specifically, UMAA is unable to bring speakers and paying attendees from abroad for its upcoming national convention. Moreover, UMAA's members are harmed in various ways, including in their ability to visit their countries of origin or obtain visas for their family members living in one of the nations targeted by the EO. The two individual plaintiffs are Yemeni nationals currently residing in the U.S. under asylum status. In the wake of civil war in Yemen resulting in tens of thousands of deaths, the plaintiffs, who are a family, came to the U.S. on visas. However, they could not afford to bring two of their five children. While in the U.S., the plaintiffs applied for visas for their two children, who fled to Djibouti for safety while awaiting their visa interviews. Without further financing, the children will be forced to return to Yemen in the absence of visas. The same day, the plaintiffs also filed notice that this case is related to Pars Equality Center v. Trump (No. 1:17-cv-00255) currently pending in the same court. The case is currently assigned to Judge Tanya S. Chutkan. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0027)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 26, 2017
City of Richmond v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration
Trial Docket: 3:17-cv-01535 (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0090
This action, filed by the city of Richmond, California, on Mar. 21, 2017, challenges President Trump’s Jan. 25, 2017 Executive Order 13768, dealing with immigration enforcement, which threatens to withhold federal funds from "sanctuary jurisdictions" and take enforcement action against any locality that impedes the federal government's immigration law. In its complaint, plaintiff asked for a declaration that Richmond complied with 8 U.S.C. § 1373, and that the Executive Order violated the Tenth Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, would require plaintiff to violate the Fourth Amendment, and violated the Separation of Powers and Spending Clauses. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0090)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 26, 2017
Adams v. Richardson
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: Civ. A. 3095-70 (D.D.C.)
SD-DC-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (SD-DC-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 26, 2017
Electronic Privacy Information Center v. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-00260-JEB (D.D.C.)
NS-DC-0098
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) adopted a communication shutdown procedure (SOP 303) intended to prevent the remote detonation of bombs without publicly disclosing the content of the procedure. The Electronic Privacy and Information Center (EPIC) filed a FOIA request in July 2012 for SOP 303, and the DHS was reluctant to disclose it. It responded to EPIC's FOIA request by saying the document could not be located, and did not respond timely to EPIC's administrative appeal of that response. EPIC filed this law suit on February 27, 2013 for injunctive relief to compel DHS to disclose the entirety of SOP 303. On May 20, 2013, the judge ordered the disclosure of any segregable portions of SOP 303. On June 28, 2013, DHS disclosed portions of the document and withheld other based on FOIA exemptions DHS believed applied to the procedure. Both parties moved for summary judgment. Judge Boasberg granted the EPIC's motion for summary judgment on the grounds that DHS did not properly apply the exemptions. The DC Court of Appeals reversed the district court's decision and remanded the case to determine whether there were segregable portions of SOP 303 that could be disclosed. DHS then submitted a redacted version of SOP 303 to Judge Boasberg, who decided that the document was disclosed liberally enough and granted judgment in favor of DHS.
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0098)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 24, 2017
ACLU Out-of-Court Settlement with the City of Colorado Springs re: Persons Jailed in Lieu of Fines
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: NA (No Court)
CJ-CO-0003
In April 2016, the City of Colorado Springs agreed, in addition to the $103,000 settlement with the ACLU of Colorado, to permanently cease converting impoverished defendants' fines into jail per unconstitutional "pay or serve" sentence that forced defendants to either pay the amount due or serve time in jail at a rate of $50 per day. The City of Colorado Springs also agreed to repeal or amend the problematic city code provisions that purported the municipal court to convert fines to jail time.
View Case Detail (CJ-CO-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 23, 2017
DOJ Investigation of Easton Police Department
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: (No Court)
PN-PA-0018
In 2005, the DOJ investigated the Easton Police Department (EPD)'s pattern of excessive force established in federal civil rights lawsuits settled for nearly $5 million from 2002-2005. In 2010, the DOJ and EPD entered into an agreement, and the DOJ continued to monitor the EPD to ensure compliance until July 2015.
View Case Detail (PN-PA-0018)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 23, 2017
Alston v. Virginia High School League
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 97-cv-00095 (W.D. Va.)
ED-VA-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (ED-VA-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 23, 2017
Utah Coalition of La Raza v. Herbert
Case Category: Immigration
Trial Docket: 2:11-cv-00401 (D. Utah)
IM-UT-0002
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-UT-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 23, 2017
DOJ Investigation of Austin Police Department
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: (No Court)
PN-TX-0006
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PN-TX-0006)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 23, 2017
Executive Order 12,333 – FOIA Lawsuit Documents
Written: Jul. 5, 2016
By: American Civil Liberties Union (American Civil Liberties Union )
This website is a collection of the documents the U.S. Government was forced to disclose as a result of the lawsuit ACLU v. NSA. The American Civil Liberties Union requested the release information about the U.S. Government's use of Executive Order 12,333 to conduct surveillance of Americans' ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
March 22, 2017
Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Lunn
Case Category: Immigration
Trial Docket: SJC-12276 (State Court)
IM-MA-0010
On Feb. 8, 2017, petitioner filed this case in the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts. Represented by counsel at the National Immigrant Justice Center and the Committee for Public Counsel Services, petitioner sued the respondent Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Petitioner alleged that by honoring ICE detainers to hold individuals past their normal release time, courts mandate state and local law enforcement to carry out a new, unlawful, and unconstitutional arrest for federal civil immigration purposes, in violation of the Tenth Amendment, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and state law. Furthermore, because ICE detainers require no judicial oversight, no showing of probable cause before seizure, and no fair notice, petitioner alleged that detainers violate the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments as well as analogous sections of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-MA-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 22, 2017
In the Matter of Alison Clark
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: Case 13-80100 (9th Cir.) (No Court)
PB-OR-0003
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PB-OR-0003)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 21, 2017
Cruel Confinement: Abuse, Discrimination and Death Within Alabama's Prisons
Written: Jun. 4, 2014
(Southern Poverty Law Center )
This website provides an investigative report by the Southern Poverty Law Center and Alabama Disabilities Program regarding deprivation of medical care to prisoners with disabilities and mental illnesses in Alabama's state prisons. *
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
March 21, 2017
New York Times v. U.S. Department of Justice
Case Category: Presidential Authority
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-01946 (S.D.N.Y.)
PR-NY-0001
The New York Times Company and Charlie Savage seek disclosure of Office of Legal Counsel ("OLC") records related to OLC's review of Trump administration executive orders. Additionally, the plaintiffs seek disclosure of OLC records related to whether the appointment of Jared Kushner to a White House role would violate anti-nepotism laws and whether the president's ongoing business operations would violate the emoluments clause.
View Case Detail (PR-NY-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 20, 2017
DOJ Investigation of City of Miami Police Department
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: (No Court)
PN-FL-0008
On July 9, 2013, the Special Litigation Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) submitted a letter of findings of their investigation of the City of Miami Police Department (MPD). The investigation was to determine whether, in violation of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 42 U.S.C. § 14141, the MPD engaged in a pattern of excessive use of deadly force by firearms in violation of the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable seizures. The DOJ found reasonable cause to believe that this was the case. The evidence leading to this conclusion was a spike in shootings. According to the DOJ, between 2008 and 2011, there were 33 shootings and investigations of those shootings were not conducted in a timely manner, likely perpetuating the existing problem. The DOJ suggested that tactical and training deficiencies were likely the cause of some of the unjustified shootings. In February of 2016, DOJ and MPD reached an agreement to improve these conditions through measures such as enhanced supervision, training, and internal investigations. The city will continue to provide reports to the DOJ on these conditions indefinitely.
View Case Detail (PN-FL-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 20, 2017
United States v. Mohamud
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 3:10-CR-00475-KI-1 (D. Or.)
NS-OR-0003
In 2010, the government initiated criminal prosecution of Mohamed Osman Mohamud in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon charging him with attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction. At the start of the proceedings, the government filed a FISA notification which gave Mohamud notice that the government intended to use information obtained and derived from electronic surveillance and a physical search conducted pursuant to FISA. When Mohamud challenged the government's compliance with the notification procedures and their legality, the district court upheld the statute and tcope of required notification of surveillance under FISA Section 702
View Case Detail (NS-OR-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 20, 2017
Planned Parenthood of Arkansas & Eastern Oklahoma Inc. v. Gillespie
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 4:15-cv-00566-KGB (E.D. Ark.)
PB-AR-0006
On September 11, 2015 two Planned Parenthood Clinics (provider plaintiffs) and three Arkansas Medicaid patients (Jane Doe Plaintiffs) filed this lawsuit in United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. The plaintiffs sued the Arkansas Department of Human Services (ADHS) under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations of the Medicaid Act and the First and Fourteenth amendments to the United States Constitution. The plaintiffs asked the court for declaratory and injunctive relief enjoining the defendant from excluding Planned Parenthood as a Medicaid provider. On January 25, 2016, Judge Baker granted the plaintiffs' requested class certification. She issued a preliminary injunction on September 28, 2016 enjoining ADHS from suspending Medicaid payments to provider plaintiffs for services received by any Arkansas Medicaid patient. On October 27, 2016 ADHS appealed the preliminary injunction. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PB-AR-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 20, 2017
E.L. v. V.L.
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: CS-13-719 (State Court)
PB-AL-0014
On October 31, 2013, an Alabama woman filed this suit to enforce her constitutional rights to her adopted children, whose biological mother she had been in relationship with two years prior. The Supreme Court eventually held that, though Georgia courts cannot by law issue "second-parent adoptions," the judgment was protected by the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution. Also, the Alabama Court of appeals noted Supreme Court precedent that there is "no roving 'public policy exception'" to full faith and credit.
View Case Detail (PB-AL-0014)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 20, 2017
Planned Parenthood Southeast, Inc. v. Bentley
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 2:15-cv-00620-MHT-TFM (M.D. Ala.)
PB-AL-0015
On August 28, 2015, Planned Parenthood Southeast, Inc. (PPSE) filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama. The plaintiff sued the Governor of Alabama and the Alabama Medicaid Agency under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations of the Medicaid Act and the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. The plaintiffs asked the court for declaratory and injunctive relief to enjoin the defendant from terminating PPSE's Medicaid provider agreement. On October 16, 2015 the plaintiffs submitted a motion to certify class. The plaintiffs asked for class certification to cover all Alabama Medicaid beneficiaries who obtained or sought to obtain health care services from PPSE. On November 30, 2015 Judge Thompson ordered a motion submitted jointly by the two parties. The order permanently enjoined the state from terminating PPSE's Medicaid provider agreements based on any allegations from the misleading video previously mentioned by the Governor or from terminating the agreement on an at-will basis. It further required the state to cover the plaintiffs' attorney fees. The case is now closed.
View Case Detail (PB-AL-0015)


CASE STUDIES
March 20, 2017
"The Supreme Court's "New" Federalism: An Anti-Rights Agenda?"
Georgia State University Law Review
Spring 2000
By: Mitchell F. Crusto (Georgia State University Faculty)
16 Ga. St. U. L. Rev. 517
In recent years, the United States Supreme Court has developed a "new" federalism doctrine. The Court's "new" federalism seeks to elevate the power of state governments over that of the federal government and, in part, encourages state governments to pursue their own constitutional rights agendas. ...
View Case Study Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
March 19, 2017
In Re Levenson
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: No. 09-80172 (district not recorded)
PB-CA-0042
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PB-CA-0042)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 19, 2017
Gaskin et al. v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 2:94-cv-04048-ER (E.D. Pa.)
ED-PA-0005
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (ED-PA-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 18, 2017
State of Tennessee v. United States Department of State
Case Category: Immigration
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-01040 (W.D. Tenn.)
IM-TN-0006
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-TN-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 18, 2017
Communities Equity v. Michigan High School Athletic Ass'n
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 98-cv-00479 (W.D. Mich.)
ED-MI-0003
Plaintiffs brought a suit against the Michigan High School Athletic Association, alleging that they were excluded from opportunities to participate in interscholastic athletic programs and received unequal treatment and benefits in those programs. The district court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, and the defendants appealed to the Court of Appeals, which affirmed the district court's ruling. The United States Supreme Court also denied review of the defendant's petition for certiorari. The parties eventually negotiated and entered into a settlement agreement which plaintiffs agreed to payment of a lesser amount in satisfaction of the fee judgments.
View Case Detail (ED-MI-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 18, 2017
Brenner v. Scott
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 4:14-cv-00107-RH-CAS (N.D. Fla.)
PB-FL-0015
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PB-FL-0015)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 18, 2017
Reynolds v. Alabama Department of Transportation
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:85-cv-00665 (M.D. Ala.)
EE-AL-0101
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (EE-AL-0101)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 17, 2017
Davison v. Oklahoma Secondary
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 98-cv-00058 (N.D. Okla.)
ED-OK-0015
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (ED-OK-0015)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 17, 2017
Schuler v. Bd. of Educ. of Cent. Islip Union Free Sch. Dist.
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 96-ED-4702 (E.D.N.Y.)
ED-NY-0013
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (ED-NY-0013)


ARTICLES ABOUT THE CLEARINGHOUSE
March 16, 2017
Executive Orders on Travel and Immigration Create a Far-from-Ordinary Semester in Michigan Law's Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
www.law.umich.edu
Written: Mar. 16, 2017
By: Julie Aust, Jamie Kessler, and Virginia Weeks (University of Michigan Law Student)
President Donald J. Trump's second travel ban for nationals from a group of predominantly Muslim countries was scheduled to take effect on March 16, 2017—until it was enjoined the day before by the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii, one of the dozens of courts examining its legality. ...
View Article Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 15, 2017
Federal Defunding Lawsuit
Written: Feb. 23, 2017
By: County of Santa Clara, Office of the County Counsel (County of Santa Clara, Office of the County Counsel)
On February 3, 2017, the County filed a federal lawsuit against President Donald Trump and members of his administration challenging his January 25, 2017 Executive Order through which he intends to deny all federal funding to any state or local government that he deems fails to comply with his ...
View Link Detail  


CASE STUDIES
March 14, 2017
"A Procedural History of Robinson v. Shelby County Board of Education "
Pacer
Written: Jul. 26, 2007
By: Chambers Staff (United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee)
The following history, while comprehensive, is not intended to be exhaustive. Certain events having little or no impact on the case have been omitted. In particular, all mention of the numerous plaintiff intervenors, other than the United States, who have come and gone over the case’s forty-four ...
View Case Study Detail  


CASE STUDIES
March 13, 2017
"A Bittersweet Victory: Public School Desegregation in Memphis"
The Journal of Negro Education
Autumn, 1986
By: Roger Biles (Oklahoma State University Faculty)
Roger Biles The Journal of Negro Education Vol. 55, No. 4 (Autumn, 1986), pp. 470-483 DOI: 10.2307/2294831
The 1954 United States Supreme Court ruling on school desegregation sent southern white supremacists in search of means to resist or at least delay implementation. Their tactics varied. Some states invoked the aged doctrine of interposition, along with the implied threat of secession; others sough ...
View Case Study Detail  


CASE STUDIES
March 13, 2017
"Desegregation: How It Happened in Clarksdale, Mississippi"
By: Brian K. Hornbuckle (The University of Mississippi Student)
The 1954 Supreme Court case Brown v. Board of Education has radically changed life in the South for both white and black citizens. Many educational institutions experienced several tumultuous years during the enforcement of the desegregation policy which resulted from Brown v. Board of Education in ...
View Case Study Detail  


CASE STUDIES
March 13, 2017
"Exploded Dream: Desegregation in the Memphis City Schools"
Law & Inequality: A Journal of Theory and Practice
2008
By: Daniel Kiel (University of Memphis Faculty)
Daniel Kiel, Exploded Dream: Desegregation in the Memphis City Schools, 26 Law & Ineq. 261 (2008) DOI: 10.2307/2294831
This Article follows the case of Northcross v. Board of Education of the Memphis City Schools from its origins 3 through a period of slow but peaceful desegregation in the 1960s and into the more confrontational busing debates of the early 1970s. The Memphis school desegregation is typical of ...
View Case Study Detail  


CASE STUDIES
March 13, 2017
"Civil Rights U.S.A./ Public Schools Southern States 1962"
Written: Jan. 1, 1962
By: The United States Commission on Civil Rights staff (The United States Commission on Civil Rights )
In its previous reports on equal protection of the laws in public schools, the Commission has presented an overview of administrative, legislative, and judicial developments since 1954 in all the Southern States where schools were organized and operated on a racially segregated basis in 1954 ...
View Case Study Detail  


CASE STUDIES
March 13, 2017
"“Get on Board, Children: The Story of Integration in Yancey County, North Carolina" "
Appalachian State University
Written: May. 1, 2011
By: Ashley Cole Brewer (Appalachian State University Student)
In the early 1950s America witnessed the beginnings of what would become one of the most significant social campaigns in the nation’s history. The murder of fourteen year old Emmett Till in the Mississippi Delta created unrest among black communities and influenced a serious social upheaval. The ...
View Case Study Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 12, 2017
Darweesh v. Trump
Written: Feb. 17, 2017
By: American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
This case challenges President Trump’s Muslim ban. The lead plaintiffs have been detained by the U.S. government and threatened with deportation even though they have valid visas to enter the United States. One plaintiff, Hameed Darweesh, an Iraqi husband and father of three, worked for the U.S. ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 12, 2017
Documents in State of Hawaii et al v. Trump—A Challenge to President Trump’s March 6, 2017 Travel Ban
By: Hogan Lovells (Hogan Lovells)
On March 7, 2017, the State of Hawaii filed a joint motion with the U.S. Government setting out a proposed briefing schedule, whereby it will file its complaint and TRO by March 8, the U.S. Government will file their Opposition on March 13, and oral argument would be held on March 15.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 12, 2017
New York City to Pay Up to $75 Million Over Dismissed Summonses
New York Times
Written: Jan. 23, 2017
By: Benjamin Weiser (New York Times)
New York City has agreed to pay up to $75 million to settle a lawsuit accusing the Police Department of issuing hundreds of thousands of criminal summonses that were found to be without legal justification. *
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 12, 2017
Louhghalam v. Trump
Written: Feb. 4, 2017
By: American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts (ACLU of Massachusetts )
If you are being detained at Logan Airport or know someone who is, please contact us: info@aclum.org.

UPDATE February 4, 11:00am: The ACLU of Massachusetts believes that the temporary restraining order issued in Boston last Sunday, January 29, 2017 to block President Trump’s Muslim ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 12, 2017
End the Travel Ban
http://endthetravelban.com/
2017
By: Pars Equality Center, the Iranian American Bar Association, the National Iranian American Council, and the Public Affairs Alliance of Iranian Americans (Pars Equality Center)
The lawsuit was filed by Iranian American civil rights lawyer Cyrus Mehri, partner of Washington, DC-based firm Mehri & Skalet, PLLC; the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law; and pro bono counsel, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer (“APKS”), on behalf of the Pars Equality Center, the Iranian ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 12, 2017
Asali v. Trump
By: American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania (American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania)
On January 27, 2017, President Trump signed an executive order that suspended all U.S. resettlement of Syrian refugees and banned all nationals from Syria and six other majority-Muslim countries from entering the United States, among other provisions.

On January 28, 2017, the Asali ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 12, 2017
Does v. Trump
By: American Civil Liberties Union of Washington (American Civil Liberties Union of Washington)
This court case is active. The ACLU-WA is representing people with valid student and work visas, including graduate students whose scientific research and career plans have been badly disrupted by Trump's Executive Order on immigration.*
View Link Detail  


CASE STUDIES
March 6, 2017
"Bush v. Orleans Parish School Board: The Second Battle of New Orleans, Chronicles of the Case and the Judge"
Loyola Law Review
Summer 2015
By: James E. Wright III
61 Loy. L. Rev. 135 2015
Bush v. Orleans Parish School Board was a decade-long struggle to have the law as declared by the U.S. Supreme Court enforced on the public schools in New Orleans.2 Because it was an epic struggle, it has been called the Second Battle of New Orleans. 3 In its day, some sixty years ago, it was ...
View Case Study Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
March 6, 2017
Executive Order Protecting The Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into The United States
Written: Mar. 6, 2017
By: President Donald Trump (President of the United States)
In light of the Ninth Circuit's observation that the political branches are better suited to determine the appropriate scope of any suspensions than are the courts, and in order to avoid spending additional time pursuing litigation, I am revoking Executive Order 13769 and replacing it with this ...
View Link Detail  


CASE STUDIES
March 6, 2017
"Bush v. Orleans Parish School Board and the Desegregation of New Orleans Public Schools"
Federal Judicial Center
2005
By: Davison M. Douglas (College of William and Mary Faculty)
The federal court proceedings surrounding the desegregation of New Orleans public schools revealed the difficult and lengthy process of enforcing the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education. Every desegregation order of the federal courts in Louisiana met with the ...
View Case Study Detail  


CASE STUDIES
March 6, 2017
"New Orleans Public School Desegregation"
Journal of the Louisiana Historical Association
Winter 1976
By: Mary Lee Muller (University of Wisconsin Student)
Louisiana History: The Journal of the Louisiana Historical Association, Vol. 17, No. 1 (Winter, 1976), pp. 69-88
At the time the United States Supreme Court handed down the momentous Brown decision of May 17, 1954, the Orleans Parish School Board (OPSB) was conducting the education of New Orleans children in a biracial system as required by state law. To ensure the separation of the races, each neighborhood ...
View Case Study Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
February 26, 2017
Census Worker Background Check Discrimination Lawsuit
http://www.censusdiscriminationlawsuit.com/
Written: Sep. 10, 2016
By: Outten & Golden (Outten & Golden)
This site was maintained by plaintiffs' counsel in this suit. *
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
February 25, 2017
Our Stories: The Case of 23-year-old DREAMer, Daniel Ramirez Medina v. Department of Homeland Security
Public Counsel
Written: Feb. 16, 2017
(Public Counsel)
In partnership with Barrera Legal Group, Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, we have filed a lawsuit challenging the detention of Daniel Ramirez Medina, a DACA recipient who was detained by ICE agents on Fri, Feb 10. We are petitioning for his immediate release, and are ...
View Link Detail  


CASE STUDIES
February 24, 2017
"Resisting Retreat: the Struggle for Equity in Educational Opportunity in the Post-Brown Era"
By: Lia B. Epperson (NAACP Legal Defense Fund)
The late Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, founder of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund (“LDF”), and head of the legal team that litigated Brown v. Board of Education, knew well the challenges desegregation posed in a nation founded on a system of racial subjugation and white supremacy.*
View Case Study Detail