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
December 7, 2018
EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-00476-CB-M (S.D. Ala.)
EE-AL-0130
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (EE-AL-0130)


CASE ADDITIONS
December 6, 2018
Jones v. Allen
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 2:06cv986 (M.D. Ala.)
CJ-AL-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (CJ-AL-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
December 5, 2018
Doe v. Cook County
Case Category: Juvenile Institution
Trial Docket: 1:99-cv-03945 (N.D. Ill.)
JI-IL-0003
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (JI-IL-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
December 5, 2018
Reid v. Donelan
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:13-cv-30125-MAP (D. Mass.)
IM-MA-0006
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-MA-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
December 4, 2018
Department of Education OCR Title IX Investigation of University of Virginia
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 11-11-6001 (No Court)
ED-VA-0003
The United States Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights(OCR) opened an investigation in 2011 to determine whether the university's policies complied with Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. OCR concluded that the university failed to comply with Title IX in several key ways. Specifically, the Sexual Misconduct Policy failed to operate procedures for prompt and equitable resolutions of complaints of sexual harassment, including sexual violence. Additionally, OCR found that the university failed to adequately respond to at least one sexual assault case. On a broader scale, OCR found that the university did not make a decision concerning whether each case, or the combination of cases, created the need for a broad response by the university to address the issue of sexual harassment and violence in the campus community. On September 17, 2015, the university entered into a voluntary Resolution Agreement. The university agreed to ongoing monitoring by OCR for at least three years following the implementation of the Resolution Agreement.
View Case Detail (ED-VA-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
December 3, 2018
Cooper v. Aaron (Little Rock School case)
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: No. 3113 (E.D. Ark.)
SD-AR-0001
Cooper v. Aaron is a school desegregation case that originated in Little Rock, Arkansas. The school district created an integration plan and was going to implement it in Little Rock Central High with the "Little Rock Nine" but before the school district put the plan into action it was met with opposition from the public and the Governor of Arkansas. The district court ruled that because of the potential for violence the plan could be delayed. This decision was appealed to the 8th cir. and the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled that the plan needed to be put into effect and the state actors could not vitiate the rights of the students. After the opinion was handed down the school district was closed for one year before the district reopened and implemented the plan.
View Case Detail (SD-AR-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
December 2, 2018
Department of Education OCR Title IX Investigation of BioHealth College
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 09-11-2027 (No Court)
ED-CA-0028
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (ED-CA-0028)


CASE ADDITIONS
December 2, 2018
Department of Education OCR Title IX Investigation of Cedarville University
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 15-13-2163 (No Court)
ED-OH-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (ED-OH-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
December 1, 2018
Department of Education OCR Title IX Investigation of Virginia Military School
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 11-08-2079 (No Court)
ED-VA-0005
A complaint filed in the Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights (OCR) made five specific allegations that the college was in violation of Title IX: 1) the college's complaint procedures did not provide for equitable resolution of cadet and employee complaints; 2) the college permitted an environment that was hostile to female cadets in both the barracks and the classroom; 3) the college's marriage and parenthood policy discriminated against female cadets; 4) the college's tenure, promotion, and sabbatical processes discriminated against female faculty; and 5) the college's fitness test discriminated against female cadets by using a scale based only on male performance. OCR opened an investigation to resolve these allegations. OCR determined that the college's grievance procedures failed to comply with Title IX, and that the college failed to provide a prompt and equitable response to complaints of sexual harassment and sexual violence. On April 30, 2014, the college entered into a Voluntary Resolution Agreement. As part of the Agreement, the college agreed to update its policy on sexual harassment, sexual assault, discrimination, and retaliation, and to revise its Title IX Grievance Procedures. The college agreed to allow ongoing monitoring by OCR until it had fully complied with the Agreement and with the regulation implementing Title IX.
View Case Detail (ED-VA-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
December 1, 2018
City of Providence v. Sessions
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-00437-JJM-LDA (D.R.I.)
IM-RI-0003
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-RI-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
December 1, 2018
Department of Education OCR Title IX Investigation of Virginia Commonwealth University
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 11-11-2031 (No Court)
ED-VA-0006
On December 3, 2010, a complaint was filed with the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights (OCR) against the university on behalf of a current student who had filed a complaint with the university after she was sexually assaulted by a male student. The complaint alleged that the university's sexual misconduct policies and procedures were discriminatory on the basis of sex. OCR determined that it had jurisdiction to determine whether the university's sexual misconduct and sexual harassment policies complied with Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, and opened an investigation into this allegation. On September 29, 2011, the university entered into a voluntary Resolution Agreement. The university was required to update its Student Sexual Misconduct Policy and its University Guidelines on Prohibition of Sexual Harassment. The university agreed to ongoing monitoring by OCR until it had fully complied with the terms of the agreement and was in compliance with the regulation implementing Title IX.
View Case Detail (ED-VA-0006)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
November 29, 2018
Chronicle of Higher Education, Title IX Tracker: Massachusetts Maritime Academy
Chronicle of Higher Education
Date: Nov. 29, 2018
By: Chronicle of Higher Education (Chronicle)
Collects documents from Department of Education OCR Title IX investigation. Campus Context: “The institution has affirmed its commitment to victims of sexual assault and collected resources online."*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
November 29, 2018
Chronicle of Higher Education, Title IX Tracker: Kentucky Wesleyan College
Chronicle of Higher Education
Date: Nov. 29, 2018
By: Chronicle of Higher Education
Collects documents from Department of Education OCR Title IX investigation. Campus Context: "The institution has affirmed its commitment to victims of sexual assault and collected resources online."*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
November 29, 2018
Chronicle of Higher Education, Title IX Tracker: George Washington University
Chronicle of Higher Education
Date: Nov. 29, 2018
By: Chronicle of Higher Education
Collects documents from Department of Education OCR Title IX investigation. Campus Context: "Sexual assault gained attention on the campus when the university resolved a federal investigation into its sexual-assault procedures." *
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
November 29, 2018
Chronicle of Higher Education, Title IX Tracker: Elmira College
Chronicle of Higher Education
Date: Nov. 29, 2018
By: Chronicle of Higher Education
Collects documents from Department of Education OCR Title IX investigation. Campus Context: "Sexual assault gained attention on the campus when the Office for Civil Rights notified campus leaders the college was under investigation."*
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
November 29, 2018
Parsons v. Ryan
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 2:12-cv-00601 (D. Ariz.)
PC-AZ-0018
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PC-AZ-0018)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 29, 2018
Reese v. Global Tel*Link Corporation
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 2:15-cv-02197 (E.D. Pa.)
PC-PA-0036
In 2015, inmates in the Pennsylvania correctional facilities filed this class action lawsuit in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The plaintiffs sued Global Tel*Link Corporation ("GTL") under the Federal Communications Act. They alleged that GTL charged exorbitant rates and fees for intrastate telephone calls to and from inmates pursuant to exclusive contracts with correctional facilities. Following consolidation with related cases in the Western District of Arkansas, Plaintiffs' motion for class certification was denied, as was their petition to appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. The case was dismissed with prejudice in 2018.
View Case Detail (PC-PA-0036)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 29, 2018
Department of Education OCR Title IX Investigation of Wesley College
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 03-15-2329 (No Court)
ED-DE-0001
On May 14, 2015, a complaint was filed with the U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (OCR) alleging that the college discriminated against a male student in violation of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 by failing to provide him with an equitable grievance and appeal process. The complaint alleged that the student, a senior at the college, had no involvement in the incident for which he was expelled, which involved students filming a sex act between a male student and a female student without the consent of the female student. The complaint further alleged that the school did not thoroughly investigate the incident, and that the student was not given adequate preparation for his judicial hearing. In a Letter of Findings dated October 12, 2016, OCR determined that the college had failed to adopt and implement Title IX grievance policies that fully complied with the requirements of Title IX. The college also failed to follow its own written procedures. The college's violations of Title IX and its own procedures resulted in the accused student being denied important procedural protections throughout the college's investigation and his subsequent expulsion. The college entered into a voluntary Resolution Agreement on September 30, 2016. The college agreed to ongoing monitoring by OCR until it has fulfilled the terms of the Resolution Agreement and fully complied with the regulations implementing Title IX.
View Case Detail (ED-DE-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 28, 2018
O.A. v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-02718-RDM (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0059
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0059)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 26, 2018
Prison Legal News v. Lappin
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:05-cv-01812-RBW (D.D.C.)
PC-DC-0021
On August 6, 2006, Prison Legal News (PLN) submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) seeking documents related to litigation expenses. They asked the BOP to waive all search and duplication fees under the FOIA. BOP refused to grant the fee waiver and PLN appealed the decision to the Department of Justice.

The DOJ upheld the denial of the request, so on September 13, 2005, PLN filed this lawsuit in the US District Court for the District of Columbia. After several years of litigation, the parties settled in 2017. The BOP produced the requested documents and agreed to pay $420,000 in attorneys' fees and costs.
View Case Detail (PC-DC-0021)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 26, 2018
Thompson v. Moss Point, Mississippi
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 1:15-cv-00182-LG-RHW (S.D. Miss.)
CJ-MS-0002
On June 12, 2015, a person jailed by the City of Moss Point, Mississippi (the City) for failing to pay a secured bail fee sued the City in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, arguing that the City had violated the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The plaintiff sought declaratory relief, injunctive relief, damages, attorneys' fees, and costs. On November 12, 2015, District Judge Louis Guirola Jr. entered a final judgement ordering the parties to follow a settlement agreement that they had reached earlier, under which the City agreed to end its secured bail policy. The case is now closed.
View Case Detail (CJ-MS-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 25, 2018
Grace v. Sessions
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-01853 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0054
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0054)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 25, 2018
Department of Justice OCR Title IX Investigation of Wheaton College
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 169-36-71 (No Court)
ED-MA-0006
The Civil Rights division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) opened an investigation in August 2015, after receiving a complaint about the college's handling of a report of sexual assault alleging violations of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. Following the investigation, the DOJ determined that although the college had made substantial efforts to improve its policies and its responses to sexual misconduct, its responses to some reports of sexual assault and retaliation during the relevant time period fell short of the standards required by Title IX. The college entered a voluntary Resolution Agreement on September 21, 2016. The Resolution Agreement required the college, among other things, to draft revised Title IX policies and procedures, to provide Title IX training to relevant employees, and to develop a system for tracking complaints of sex discrimination.
View Case Detail (ED-MA-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 25, 2018
Department of Education OCR Title IX Investigation of Wittenberg University
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 15-13-2141 (No Court)
ED-OH-0004
On April 10, 2013, the U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (OCR) received a complaint filed by a university student, which alleged that the university discriminated against her on the basis of sex. Specifically, the complaint alleged that the university failed to respond appropriately, including by conducting a timely investigation, when the student was sexually assaulted by a male student athlete, in violation of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. OCR's investigation found that the university violated Title IX, and the university entered into a voluntary Resolution Agreement in March 2017, agreeing, among other things, to update its Title IX policies and grievance procedures and to submit to OCR monitoring until it had fulfilled the terms of the agreement.
View Case Detail (ED-OH-0004)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 25, 2018
Department of Education OCR Title IX Investigation of Wittenberg University
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 15-11-2115 (No Court)
ED-OH-0003
On July 26, 2011, the U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (OCR) received a complaint filed on behalf of a university student. The complaint alleged that the university failed to respond appropriately when the student reported that she was sexually assaulted by a male student athlete. The complaint further alleged that the university's grievance policy did not comply with Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. OCR's investigation found that the university violated Title IX, and the university entered into a voluntary Resolution Agreement in March 2017, agreeing, among other things, to update its Title IX policies and grievance procedures and to submit to OCR monitoring until it had fulfilled the terms of the agreement.
View Case Detail (ED-OH-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 24, 2018
Turkmen v. Ashcroft
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:02-cv-02307-JG-SMG (E.D.N.Y.)
IM-NY-0007
Turkmen v. Ashcroft is one of two related actions filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York by plaintiffs who were investigated and detained for suspected terrorist ties in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. Consolidated appeals were heard on May 1, 2014, and the Court affirmed in part, denied in part, and remanded the case to the district court. The District Court dismissed the plaintiffs' claims due to individual officers' qualified immunity and had yet to rule on another motion to dismiss claims against the MDC. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-NY-0007)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 24, 2018
East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-06810 (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0137
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0137)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 23, 2018
Department of Education OCR Title IX Investigation of Xavier University
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 15-12-2048 (No Court)
ED-OH-0002
A filed a complaint against the university on November 15, 2011, alleging that the university failed to respond appropriately when a female student reported that she was sexually assaulted and then stalked by a male student, and that the university failed to follow its own written procedures or the procedural requirements of Title IX in addressing allegations of sexual harassment or assault. A second complaint filed on January 25, 2012, made similar allegations, and further alleged that the university did not follow through with the sanctions it imposed on the perpetrator for his conduct code violation, and did not take reasonable steps to prevent and eliminate sexual harassment of which it was on notice. The OCR combined the complaints into one investigation, and investigated whether the university failed to promptly and appropriately respond to alleged sexual harassment in violation of Title IX and whether the university had adopted and published grievance procedures providing for the prompt and equitable resolution of student complaints of discrimination on the basis of sex. The university voluntarily entered into a Resolution Agreement on July 23, 2012, agreeing, among other things, to update its grievance procedures to comply with Title IX. The OCR continued to monitor the agreement, and the investigation is now closed.
View Case Detail (ED-OH-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 23, 2018
Department of Education OCR Title IX Investigation of Butte College
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 09-13-2096 (No Court)
ED-CA-0029
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (ED-CA-0029)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 22, 2018
Department of Education OCR Title IX Investigation of Buffalo State College
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 02-15-2085 (No Court)
ED-NY-0020
In 2015, a student at SUNY -- Buffalo State College filed a Title IX complaint with the U.S Department of Education, New York Office for Civil Rights (OCR). She alleged that her school failed to adequately respond to her report of sexual assault. OCR ultimately found that the College had violated Title IX by inadequately responding to the student’s complaint and failing to adequately train its staff. In 2017, the College entered into a resolution agreement with OCR where it agreed to provide compensation to the student and make a number of changes to its Title IX policy. As a part of the agreement, the College is subject to ongoing reporting and monitoring through at least 2019.
View Case Detail (ED-NY-0020)


CASE STUDIES
November 19, 2018
"It's All About the Money, Money, Money: Criminalizing Poverty"
https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/directories/pro_bono_clearinghouse/ejc_2016_68.pdf
Date: Nov. 19, 2018
By: Nusrat J. Choudhury, Lisa Foster, Danielle Elyce Hirsch (American Bar Association)
It's All About the Money, Money, Money: Criminalizing Poverty, American Bar Association, (March 8, 2016), https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/directories/pro_bono_clearinghouse/ejc_2016_68.pdf
Compilation of research materials on criminalization of poverty assembled by the American Bar Association. Includes articles and documents touching on the Biloxi, Mississippi settlement as a model for addressing excessive incarceration for failure to pay fines. *
View Case Study Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
November 19, 2018
Kennedy v. City of Biloxi
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 1:15-cv-00348 (S.D. Miss.)
CJ-MS-0004
In 2015, a group of persons charged and jailed for unpaid fines and fees filed this class action lawsuit in US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi. The plaintiffs alleged that the City of Biloxi, Mississippi and its policymakers engaged in policies that amounted to a modern-day debtors' prison. In 2016, the parties reached a settlement that required the City of Biloxi to enact sweeping reforms. The court's supervision is ongoing.
View Case Detail (CJ-MS-0004)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 19, 2018
United States of America v. The State of New York
Case Category: Juvenile Institution
Trial Docket: 1:10-cv-00858 (N.D.N.Y.)
JI-NY-0009
In December 2007, the DOJ Civil Rights Division began an investigation into the conditions at four New York juvenile facilities. After an investigation, the DOJ published a findings letter detailing improper and unconstitutional use of excessive force and restraints within the facilities. On July 14, 2010, the United States filed suit to enforce a settlement agreement against the State of New York and the New York State Office of Children and Family Services. The agreement set forth remedial terms and required monitors to produce status reports. By October 20, 2017, all of the facilities had either closed or achieved substantial compliance with the settlement agreement. This case is now closed.
View Case Detail (JI-NY-0009)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 19, 2018
State of California v. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:17-cv-05235-MEJ (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0096
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0096)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
November 18, 2018
Chronicle of Higher Education, Title IX Tracker: Cedarville University
Chronicle of Higher Education
Date: Nov. 18, 2018
By: Chronicle of Higher Education
Collects documents from Department of Education OCR Title IX investigation. Campus Context: Sexual assault gained attention on the campus when the Office for Civil Rights notified leaders that Cedarville was under investigation.
*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
November 18, 2018
Chronicle of Higher Education, Title IX Tracker: Buffalo State College
Chronicle of Higher Education
Date: Nov. 18, 2018
By: Chronicle of Higher Education
Collects documents from Department of Education OCR Title IX investigation. Campus Context: The institution has affirmed its commitment to victims, collected resources online, introduced an anonymous reporting form, and promoted an awareness campaign called I “Heart” Consent.
*
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
November 18, 2018
Kindhearts for Charitable Humanitarian Development v. Paulsen
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 3:08-CV-2400 (N.D. Ohio)
NS-OH-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (NS-OH-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 18, 2018
Al Otro Lado v. Kelly
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:17-cv-02366-BAS-KSC (S.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0092
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0092)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 18, 2018
Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center v. Sage Hospitality Resources LLC
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 1:15-cv-00236 (D. Colo.)
DR-CO-0023
This case was one of four class action lawsuits filed in 2015 by the Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center, alleging that four major hotel owners and operators discriminated against individuals with mobility disabilities in the provision of hotel shuttle transportation. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado on February 4, 2015, under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The parties reached a confidential settlement agreement, in which the defendant agreed to direct its hotel-operating subsidiaries to comply with the requirements of Title III of the ADA concerning transportation services.
View Case Detail (DR-CO-0023)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 18, 2018
The Ave Maria Foundation v. Sebelius
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 13-cv-15198 (E.D. Mich.)
FA-MI-0013
On December 20, 2013, a group of non-profit organizations filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan under the First Amendment, Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and the Administrative Procedure Act against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The plaintiffs believe that even with the accommodation for non-profit, religious organizations, the Affordable Care Act's contraception insurance mandate violates their owner's religious beliefs. On January 13, 2013 U.S. District Court (Judge Stephen J. Murphy, III.) granted the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction. On January 23, 2014, the court granted a joint motion to stay the case pending the defendants' decision to appeal the preliminary injunction. In February 2018, the plaintiffs jointly stipulated to dismissal, and the case is now closed.
View Case Detail (FA-MI-0013)


CASE STUDIES
November 16, 2018
"Jailhouse Medicine -- Travesty of Justice?"
Date: Nov. 1972
By: Seth B. Goldsmith
87 Health Service Reports 767 (Nov. 1972)
Inmates of the Orleans Parish Prison in New Orleans, La., are, for the first time, well on the way to receiving first class medical care under a system that may be a model for the nation. Acting under Federal court orders, this county correctional institution and the City of New Orleans have ...
View Case Study Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
November 16, 2018
Hampton v. Baldwin
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-00550-NJR-RJD (S.D. Ill.)
PC-IL-0044
A transgender woman incarcerated at a men's prison in Illinois brought this action against the Illinois Department of Corrections and its officers in federal court, for abuse, harassment, and equal protection violations. The plaintiff sought an injunction ordering the Department to transfer her to a women's facility. On November 7, 2018, Judge Nancy Rosenstengel of the Southern District of Illinois granted a preliminary injunction requiring the defendants to provide basic mental health services to the plaintiff and consider all evidence as to whether she should be transferred to a women's prison.
View Case Detail (PC-IL-0044)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 16, 2018
Prison Legal News v. The GEO Group
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:14-cv-01957-JMS-DKL (S.D. Ind.)
PC-IN-0019
In November 2014, Prison Legal News filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in federal district court against The GEO Group, a for-profit corporation that operates and manages a state correctional facility in Indiana, as well as against the state. The plaintiff claimed that the defendants violated its First and Fourteenth Amendment rights by prohibiting the distribution of its monthly journal to prisoners in custody and by failing to provide notice of this censorship and an opportunity to contest it. In January 2015, the parties reached an agreement and filed a stipulation to enter a consent injunction, which the court ordered the next day. Under the agreement, the defendants are enjoined from preventing the distribution of the journal without providing sufficient justification and are required to post the consent injunction in their facilities and conduct compliance training for the mailroom staff.
View Case Detail (PC-IN-0019)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
November 14, 2018
Migrant Justice v. Ice
Migrant Justice
Date: 11/13/2018
By: Migrant Justice
http://www.migrantjustice.net/MJ-v-ICE
A summary and explanation of the case Migrant Justice v. Nielsen. *
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
November 14, 2018
Southwest Williamson County Community Ass’n v. Slater
Case Category: Environmental Justice
Trial Docket: 3:97-0734 (M.D. Tenn.)
EJ-TN-0001
On July 14, 1997, Southwest Williamson County Community Association, Inc., a community organization, filed a complaint against federal and state officials to block the construction of 840–South which would traverse through the Middle Tennessee counties of Dickson, Williamson, and Rutherford. The complaint alleged that the federal and state officials had not complied with Federal and State environmental laws. Defendant’s filed a motion to dismiss the case alleging that Plaintiff’s had failed to state a claim. Plaintiff’s appealed the District Court’s decision to grant Defendant’s motion to dismiss and then to dismiss Plaintiff’s request for preliminary injunction. The case closed on September 27, 2001, when District Court Judge Campbell granted Defendants motion to dismiss for a second time.
View Case Detail (EJ-TN-0001)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
November 12, 2018
Chronicle of Higher Education, Title IX Tracker: Butte College
Chronicle of Higher Education
Date: Nov. 12, 2018
By: Chronicle of Higher Education
Collects documents from Department of Education OCR Title IX investigation. Campus context: "Sexual assault gained attention on the campus when a lawyer, Jim McCabe, filed a federal complaint against the college in February 2013, saying that a female student he represented was raped by an unnamed ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
November 11, 2018
Tuyizere v. Utica City School District Board of Education
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 6:15-cv-00488-DNH-TWD (N.D.N.Y.)
IM-NY-0052
In 2015, six refugees living in Utica, NY filed this class action in the Northern District of New York against the Utica School District Board of Education and the Utica City School District. The plaintiffs alleged that that the defendants consistently denied Utica residents between the ages of 17 and 20 who were limited English proficient (LEP) and immigrants access to educational opportunity. In 2016, the parties reached a settlement requiring the defendants to end their discriminatory practices and enact a detailed remedial plan. Enforcement of the consent decree is ongoing as of November 2018.
View Case Detail (IM-NY-0052)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 11, 2018
Diouf v. Napolitano
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:06-cv-07452-TJH (C.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0136
A detained immigrant and spouse of a U.S. citizen sought habeas relief after being detained for over 18 months without a bond hearing before an Immigration Judge. The case culminated in a published decision from the Ninth Circuit, holding that an individual facing prolonged immigration detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(6) is entitled to an individualized bond hearing and to release on bond unless the government establishes that he is a flight risk or a danger to the community.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0136)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 11, 2018
Barrietos v. City of Farmers Branch
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:07-cv-00061-L (N.D. Tex.)
IM-TX-0002
This case is one of four lawsuits filed against the City of Farmers Branch, Texas, to challenge the City's anti-immigrant housing law, Ordinance 2892. See IM-TX-0001, IM-TX-0003 and IM-TX-0004. This case and two others filed in federal court, Vazquez v. City of Farmers Branch (IM-TX-0001) and Villas at Parkside Partners v. City of Farmers Branch (IM-TX-0003), were assigned to District Court Judge Sam A. Lindsay, and on April 18, 2007, were consolidated under lead case Villas at Parkside Partners (IM-TX-0003). See IM-TX-0003 for subsequent developments.
View Case Detail (IM-TX-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 11, 2018
Triune Health Group, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Health and Human Servs.
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 12-cv-06756 (N.D. Ill.)
FA-IL-0004
On August 22, 2012, Triune Health Group, Inc. and its owners filed this lawsuit in the Northern District of Illinois against the Federal Government, contending that mandatory contraception coverage under the Affordable Care Act violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. On January 3, 2013, Judge Amy St. Eve granted plaintiffs a preliminary injunction stopping the Federal Government from enforcing the contraception mandate. Following the Supreme Court's ruling in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, the parties attempted to settle on language for a permanent injunction. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (FA-IL-0004)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 9, 2018
In re Motion of ProPublica, Inc. for the Release of Court Records [FISC Docket Misc. 13-09]
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: Misc. 13-09 (FISC)
NS-DC-0027
On November 20, 2013, ProPublica, represented by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, filed a motion in the FISC for release of court records, including opinions that were referenced in, but redacted from, an August 29, 2013 opinion in FISA docket BR 13-109. There has been no activity on this docket since December 2013.
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0027)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 9, 2018
Norsworthy v. Beard
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 3:14-cv-00695-JST (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0068
In this federal civil rights action in the Northern District of California, a transgender prisoner sought sex reassignment surgery, alleging that failure to provide it constituted Cruel and Unusual Punishment and violated her Equal Protection rights. The District Court ordered the prison to provide the surgery on April 2, 2015. Defendants filed a notice of appeal, and while this appeal was pending - one day prior to oral argument - the plaintiff was released on parole from the California prison system. As such, the appeal was dismissed. Before the district court could issue a final decision on remand whether to vacate its prior preliminary injunction order, which would have rendered the precedent moot, plaintiff and defendant settled.
View Case Detail (PC-CA-0068)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 9, 2018
In re Application of the FBI for an Order Requiring the Production of Tangible Things From [Redacted], BR 10-70
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: BR 10-70 (FISC)
NS-DC-0044
This is one of the numerous FISC orders under Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act approving the NSA's so-called "Bulk Telephony Metadata Program." Under this program, the NSA has collected information about, but not the contents of, virtually all domestic telephone calls. This particular order, granted by FISC Judge Reggie B. Walton, ran from October 2010 to January 2011.
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0044)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 9, 2018
Elhady v. Piehota
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:16-cv-00375-AJT-JFA (E.D. Va.)
NS-VA-0008
This case marks the first time the Trump Administration has invoked the state secrets privilege in a challenge to the Terrorism Screening Database (TSDB or “the watch list”). The plaintiffs, a group of Muslim-American U.S. citizens who believed that they were on the watchlist, filed their lawsuit in April 2016 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. They said that the watchlist subjected them to invasive travel screening and reputational harm, and lacked a constitutionally adequate mechanism for having their names removed. The plaintiffs alleged that this violated their Fifth Amendment due process and equal protection rights, the Administrative Procedure Act, and the nondelegation doctrine. In 2017, Judge Anthony J. Trenga dismissed the plaintiffs' substantive due process, equal protection, and non-delegation claims, while allowing their procedural due process and APA claims to proceed to discovery. In April 2018, the government formally invoked the state secrets privilege in response to a motion to compel filed by the plaintiffs the month prior, asserting that they were seeking documents that touched on information shared by foreign governments and other sensitive national security information. After oral arguments in May 2018, Magistrate Judge John F. Anderson ordered the government to produce the documents requested by the plaintiffs, redacted of any classified or privileged information, and also ordered the government to produce the same documents for the court's in camera ex parte inspection. The case is still ongoing.
View Case Detail (NS-VA-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 8, 2018
Jackson v. Fort Stanton Hospital & Training School
Case Category: Intellectual Disability (Facility)
Trial Docket: 1:87-cv-0839-JAP-KBM (D.N.M.)
ID-NM-0003
On July 8, 1987 a class action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico, challenging the institutionalization of developmentally disabled individuals at two state-run facilities, and seeking to have the residents transferred into community living situations. In June of 1988, a group of parents and guardians of class members intervened, opposing the Plaintiffs' efforts to require the mandatory transfer, but seeking to improve the conditions at the facilities. In 1990, the Court ruled that the facilities were in violation of the Rehabilitation Act, and required the parties to develop a plan for remediation. The two facilities both later closed, one in 1995, and the other in 1997, however the State of New Mexico still had remedial obligations arising from the 1990 decision. In 1997 the parties consented to a Joint Stipulation on Disengagement, wherein the defendants made extensive commitments relating to the services provided to the plaintiff class members. This agreement was modified by a 2005 Joint Stipulation, and in 2010 the plaintiffs filed a motion alleging non-compliance with the two joint stipulations. This led the court to conduct fact-finding hearings and, in October 2012, to release a 200-plus page Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, holding that the defendants were substantially non-compliant. In January 2013 the court appointed a Compliance Administrator, and stated that it expected the Defendants to come into full compliance within 18 months. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (ID-NM-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 7, 2018
United States v. Franklin Parish School Board
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: 3:70-cv-15632-RGJ-KLH (W.D. La.)
SD-LA-0017
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (SD-LA-0017)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 7, 2018
McCrory v. United States
Case Category: Public Accomm./Contracting
Trial Docket: 5:16-cv-00238 (E.D.N.C.)
PA-NC-0003
After North Carolina passed a bill called HB2, which restricts the rights of transgender individuals to access public restrooms and changing facilities that are in accordance with their gender identities, the U.S. DOJ informed Governor Pat McCRoy of North Carolina that it considered the law in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, Title IX of the Education Amendment, and the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). The DOJ asked Governor McCroy to indicate that he wouldn't enforce the law, but he declined to do so, and instead brought suit against the DOJ in the Eastern District Court of North Carolina asking to court for declaratory relief against the DOJ.
View Case Detail (PA-NC-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 6, 2018
Bell v. City of Boise
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 1:09-cv-00540-REB (D. Idaho)
CJ-ID-0002
Homeless residents of the City of Boise sued the City in federal district court in 2009 because of the allegedly unfair targeting of anti-camping and loitering ordinances against the City's homeless. The plaintiffs alleged that the enactment and enforcement of these ordinances had the effect of criminalizing homelessness, in violation of their 14th and 8th Amendment rights. The district court twice dismissed the suit, but a Ninth Circuit panel reversed both times, holding that the ordinances may violate the Eighth Amendment. A motion for rehearing en banc is currently pending.
View Case Detail (CJ-ID-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 2, 2018
Electronic Frontier Foundation v. Department of Justice
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:14-cv-00760-RMC (D.D.C.)
NS-DC-0081
In 2014, an international non-profit digital rights group, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), filed a FOIA request in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Plaintiffs sought the expedited processing and release of records requested from the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the National Security Division. It appears that during the litigation process, the DOJ produced various documents, and EFF withdrew most of its requests. In October 2015, the District Court denied EFF’s request for one specific Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) opinion on the grounds that it was exempt from disclosure because the opinion was properly classified and because its disclosure was prohibited by statute. EFF appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in December 2015. In April 2016, EFF moved to voluntarily dismiss the appeal, as the FISC opinion it sought had become publicly available. The case is closed.
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0081)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 2, 2018
Green v. Washington
Case Category: Indigent Defense
Trial Docket: 1:93-cv-07300 (N.D. Ill.)
PD-IL-0001
This class action arose from a habeas petition filed on December 3, 1993 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. On January 24, 1994, 366 prisoners who had filed a habeas corpus representative action against the State became certified members of the class. The petitioners argued that the state's delay of two years or more from the notice of appeal without an issuance of a state appellate decision in the petitioner's direct appeal was a violation of the constitutional right to a timely appeal. The petitioners prevailed and the court ordered that the state file a complete report providing the feasibility of resolving the appeals of petitioners that remained unresolved for two years or more. The respondent-appellants appealed the case to the Seventh Circuit on February 6, 1998. The appeal was voluntarily dismissed and the case is now closed.
View Case Detail (PD-IL-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 2, 2018
Cain v. New Orleans
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 2:15-cv-04479-SSV-JCW (E.D. La.)
CJ-LA-0011
In 2015, indigent former criminal defendants filed this putative class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. Plaintiffs alleged that that the defendants had a practice of imprisoning individuals who had failed to pay court debts without meaningfully determining whether the individuals had the ability to pay the debt. In August 2018, granted plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, and held that the Judges’ policy/practice of not inquiring into the ability of the persons falling within the certified class to pay before they are imprisoned for non-payment of court debts was unconstitutional, and that the Judges’ failure to provide a neutral forum for determination of such persons’ ability to pay was unconstitutional. The defendants appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and as of October 2018, that appeal is ongoing.
View Case Detail (CJ-LA-0011)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 2, 2018
United States v. Aws Mohammed Younis Al-Jayab
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 1:16-cr-00181 (N.D. Ill.)
NS-IL-0003
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (NS-IL-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 2, 2018
Holt v. Hobbs
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 5:11-cv-00164-BSM-JJV (E.D. Ark.)
PC-AR-0014
On June 28, 2011, a devout Muslim inmate at the Arkansas Department of Corrections' Cummins Unit filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act ("RLUIPA") alleging that the prison grooming policy interfered with his religious practices. The District Court held that the grooming policy was the least restrictive means of furthering the government's compelling interest in prison security, and dismissed the case. The Eight Circuit affirmed, but the on Jan. 20, 2015, the Supreme Court unanimously disagreed, and held that the prisoners must be allowed to grow a 1/2 inch beard. Plaintiff attempted to reopen the case in November 2015, but the court denied plaintiff's motion to reopen the case because he brought forth new claims.
View Case Detail (PC-AR-0014)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 2, 2018
Ashker v. Brown
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 4:09-cv-05796-CW (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0054
In 2009, California prisoners in solitary confinement filed this class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Plaintiffs alleged that being held in solitary confinement for more than a decade violates the Eighth Amendment, and that the assignment procedures lack sufficient due process. In 2015, the parties settled the case, and the CDC agreed to significant changes in solitary confinement policies. On November 20, 2017, plaintiffs moved for an extension of the settlement agreement based on systemic due process violations. Plaintiff's rationale included firstly, the CDCR's misuse of unreliable confidential information to return class members to solitary confinement; secondly, inadequate procedural protections related to placement and retention of class members; and thirdly, CDCR's continuance of using constitutionally infirm gang validations that were still being relied on to deny class members a fair opportunity for parole. Plaintiffs stated these grounds were further confirmed upon defendants' production of relevant documents on February 6, 2018, and July 3, 2018. The parties met and conferred on August 21, 2018, but could not find resolution.
View Case Detail (PC-CA-0054)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 1, 2018
Garcia v. Vilsack
Case Category: Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Trial Docket: 1:00-cv-02445 (D.D.C.)
FH-DC-0010
On October 13, 2000, a group of Hispanic farmers and ranchers filed this lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, asserting that the USDA had engaged, and continued to engage, in anti-Hispanic lending and assistance practices. The case is now closed, with most of the plaintiffs entering an alternative dispute resolution process, three plaintiffs severing and transferring their claims, and one voluntarily dismissing.
View Case Detail (FH-DC-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 1, 2018
R.J. v. Bishop
Case Category: Juvenile Institution
Trial Docket: 1:12-cv-07289 (N.D. Ill.)
JI-IL-0004
In September 2012, youth confined in facilities operated by the Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice (IDJJ) filed this class-action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois under § 1983 against the IDJJ. The plaintiffs, represented by the ACLU, asked the court for declaratory and injunctive relief, claiming that systemic IDJJ conditions, services, and treatment violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. After granting class certification, the District Court approved a consent decree and a remedial plan, under which the IDJJ is responsible for making numerous changes to its policies in such areas as solitary confinement, special education, mental health services, and protection of LGBT youth.
View Case Detail (JI-IL-0004)


CASE ADDITIONS
November 1, 2018
EEOC v. Harris Farms, Inc.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: F-02-6199-AWI LJO (E.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0104
In 2002, the EEOC and intervening plaintiff, a female farm worker, filed this complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California. Plaintiffs allege that defendant and its agents engaged in discriminatory practices which violated Title VII of the Civil Rights act of 1964. In 2005, the plaintiff was awarded $994,000 in monetary damages, and the defendant was enjoined from further retaliation against employees. On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the District Court's ruling, and the case was closed in December, 2008.
View Case Detail (EE-CA-0104)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 31, 2018
National Federation of the Blind v. Scribd, Inc.
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 2:14-cv-00162-wks (D. Vt.)
DR-VT-0002
In 2014, the National Federation of the Blind filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court of Vermont. The plaintiff, representing the rights of the blind persons, sought a permanent injunction against the defendant Scribd, provider of eBooks, to make the services provided by its website and apps fully accessible to blind persons and to maintain that accessibility. On November 10, 2015, the parties settled the case and Scribd agreed to address accessibility concerns, promising full accessibility by 2017.
View Case Detail (DR-VT-0002)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 30, 2018
May 13, 2016 Dear Colleague Letter
U.S. Department of Education
Date: May 13, 2016
By: Catherine E. Lhamon, Vanita Gupta (U.S. Department of Education, U.S. Department of Justice)
Catherine E. Lhamon, Assistant Sec'y for Civil Rights, U.S. Dep't of Educ., Dear Colleague Letter (May 13, 2016), https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201605-title-ix-transgender.pdf.
The Department of Education and Department of Justice published a Dear Colleague instructing educational institutions receiving federal funding that transgender students were protected from discrimination under Title IX. Specifically, transgender students were entitled to use educational facilities ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 30, 2018
February 22, 2017 Dear Colleague Letter
United States Department of Education
Date: Feb. 22, 2018
By: Sandra Battle, T.E. Wheeler II (US Department of Education, US Department of Justice)
Sandra Battle, Acting Assistant Sec'y for Civil Rights, U.S. Dep't of Educ., Dear Colleague Letter (Feb. 22, 2017), https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201702-title-ix.pdf.
The US Department of Education and the US Department of Justice rescind Obama-era guidance finding that schools receiving federal funding were required schools to treat students in a manner consistent with their gender identity rather than their sex assigned at birth. This included allowing ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
October 30, 2018
Korte v. United States Department of Health and Human Services
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 3:12-cv-01072-MJR-PMF (S.D. Ill.)
FA-IL-0006
In 2012, Catholic business owners filed this RFRA challenge to rules adopted pursuant to the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The plaintiffs argued that the rules infringed on their religious freedom by requiring them to provide coverage for contraception through their business's group health insurance plan. In December 2012, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois denied the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, finding that the contraception mandate did not impose a substantial burden on the plaintiffs' religious freedom. On appeal, the Seventh Circuit granted the plaintiffs' motion for an emergency injunction pending appeal and consolidated the case with Grote v. Sebelius. On November 8, 2013, the Seventh Circuit reversed and remanded with instructions to enter preliminary injunctions barring enforcement of the mandate. The government sought review in the Supreme Court, but its petition was denied on July 1, 2014, the day after the Supreme Court issued its Hobby Lobby decision on a similar question. On November 7, 2014, the Court granted summary judgment for the plaintiffs and entered a permanent injunction preventing the defendants from enforcing the contraceptive services mandate against the plaintiffs.
View Case Detail (FA-IL-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 30, 2018
Castillon v. Correction Corporation of America
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:12-cv-00559 (D. Idaho)
PC-ID-0009
Eight inmates at Idaho Correction Correctional Center filed a lawsuit against Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), which operates the facility. The plaintiffs had been the victims of a gang assault and alleged that CCA was using gang violence as way to gain control over the inmate population and decrease their operating costs. After a long litigation and a jury trial, judgment was entered in favor of the defendant. This case is now closed.
View Case Detail (PC-ID-0009)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 30, 2018
Gonzalez, et al. v. Comcast Corporation, et al.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:03-cv-00445-KAJ (D. Del.)
EE-DE-0038
Former employees filed an employment discrimination action against Comcast and several of its employees, for violation of Title VII, federal laws, and state contract law. The plaintiffs alleged that they were fired for expressing their support for an African-American Human Resources manager who was denied the opportunity to apply for a promotion due to her race and gender. The judge granted partial summary judgment in favor of the defendants. Both parties filed a stipulated dismissal of the case, which was closed on November 5, 2004.
View Case Detail (EE-DE-0038)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 30, 2018
Max v. Maytag Corp
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 04 C 4617 (N.D. Ill.)
EE-IL-0154
This lawsuit was filed in July 2004 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois by a 62-year-old employee against his former employer. The plaintiff alleged that he was demoted and not promoted because of his age, in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. In October 2004, the case was consolidated with EEOC v. Maytag, which alleged class-wide age discrimination against a group of Regional Sales Managers. After surviving a motion to dismiss, the cases resolved by consent decree in December 2005. Maytag agreed to pay class members a total of $334,500, to post notice of the decree for employees, to provide training in age discrimination law for its managers and supervisors, and to report semi-annually to the EEOC on the age of employees promoted and demoted. The settlement agreement remained in effect for two years. This case is now closed.
View Case Detail (EE-IL-0154)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 29, 2018
Orantes-Hernandez v. Meese
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:82-cv-01107-MMM-VBK (C.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0039
In 1982, a group of Salvadoran refugees filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, challenging practices and procedures of the Immigration and Naturalization Service ("INS") in detaining, processing and removing those seeking political asylum from El Salvador. On April 30, 1982, the district court (Judge David Kenyon) certified a nationwide class and issued a preliminary injunction. In 2005, the government moved to dissolve the permanent injunction on various grounds. On July 24, 2007, Judge Morrow issued an order refusing to dissolve most provisions of the injunction for substantial non-compliance. On July 10, 2014, prompted by the government's initial response to the large influx of unaccompanied alien children ("UAC") and families, the plaintiffs filed an application for a temporary restraining order ("TRO"). On July 17, 2014, the Court denied the plaintiffs' motion for TRO, but construed and granted the plaintiffs' arguments as a motion for post-trial discovery, as there was evidence of the government's noncompliance with the injunction.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0039)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 29, 2018
M.B. v. Tidball
Case Category: Child Welfare
Trial Docket: 2:17-cv-04102-NKL (W.D. Mo.)
CW-MO-0003
On June 12 2017, five children filed this class action lawsuit in the Western District of Missouri against Missouri's Department of Social Services and the Children's Division ("CD") for substantive due process rights violations, procedural due process rights violations, and violations of the Federal Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act. Plaintiffs argue that the Plaintiff Class has suffered or will suffer substantial and often irreversible harm to their physical, emotional, and/or mental health because of the Defendants' improper medication of the Plaintiffs. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (CW-MO-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 29, 2018
Maldonado v. Holder
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: n/a (No Court)
IM-CT-0010
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-CT-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 28, 2018
Glover v. City of Laguna Beach
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 8:15-cv-01332-AG-DFM (C.D. Cal.)
PB-CA-0045
Several disabled homeless persons sue the City of Luguna Beach, California, in the U.S. District Court of Central California, alleging that the Laguna Beach Police Department enforces anti-camping laws against them despite the city's failure to provide alternative housing that can accommodate their disabilities, in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S Constitution, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. § 12132), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. §§ 706, 794), and Article I, sections 7 and 17 of the California Constitution. Judge Andrew J. Guilford granted the plaintiffs' motion for class-certification. After Judge Guilford ruled on cross-motions for summary judgment, the only remaining issues were the plaintiffs' ADA and RA claims. After extensive settlement negotiations, the parties are awaiting final approval of their settlement agreement.
View Case Detail (PB-CA-0045)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 28, 2018
L.R. v. Azar
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:18-cv-05741 (C.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0124
In June 2018, unaccompanied immigrant children in the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) custody sued ORR and HHS, of which it is a component agency, in District Court for the Central District of California. Plaintiffs alleged Due Process and Flores Settlement violations due to their continued detainment in ORR custody even though they had parents or other custodians available to receive them, and because ORR administered psychotropic drugs on them without parental consent. In September 2018, the court denied preliminary injunctions for two of the named plaintiffs detained in southern Texas ORR facilities for lack of jurisdiction. The court found that their habeas petitions were properly venued in the Southern District of Texas against the ORR Field Specialists responsible for their care if the plaintiffs were to refile. The plaintiffs' September 2018 motion for class certification and the defendants' September motion to dismiss remain pending. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0124)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 28, 2018
Aleman Gonzalez v. Sessions
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-01869-JSC (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0120
Two San Francisco Bay Area fathers filed this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California after being detained for over 6 months in ICE custody without a bond hearing. The court granted a preliminary injunction and class certification ordering that individuals detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(6) pending a determination as to whether they can remain in the United States with “live claims” before an adjudicative body cannot be detained for more than 180 days without a bond hearing. The government appealed both orders to the Ninth Circuit and the case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0120)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 26, 2018
Armstrong v. Brown
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 4:94-cv-02307-CW (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001
Disabled prisoners and parolees in California filed a class action lawsuit in 1994 in the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California, charging that, on account of their disabilities, the state was depriving disabled prisoners of benefits and accommodations provided to other prisoners or required by due process. They sought declaratory and injunctive relief for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), the Rehabilitation Act ("RA"), and the Due Process Clause of the Constitution. In a series of injunctions and remedial orders, the court ordered that the State had to identify and track disabled prisoners and parolees and provide reasonable accommodations in prison facilities and at parole hearings. The court has declared that failing to adhere to the ADA and its prior orders on the grounds of shortage of bed space is impermissible and a violation of law. Currently the State is under extensive monitoring by Plaintiff's counsel. A joint case status statement was filed on May 15, 2017, presenting the statuses of issues at contention such as accommodation, restricted access to programs, allegations of abuse and more. The parties will continue to work collaboratively on these issues without court interference.
View Case Detail (PC-CA-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 25, 2018
United States v. County of Los Angeles and Los Angeles County Sheriff [USDOJ CRIPA Investigation]
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 2:15-cv-05903 (C.D. Cal.)
JC-CA-0005
In 1996, the Department of Justice began a CRIPA investigation of the Los Angeles County Jail system. The investigation found that the Jails were failing to provide care meeting constitutional standards to mentally ill inmates. In 2002, the parties reached a Memorandum of Agreement. The parties continued working to resolve deficiencies in the settlement agreement. In August 2015, a new settlement was reached focused on suicide prevention and mental health care within the Jails. In December 2015, individuals with mental illnesses and disabilities previously incarcerated in the Jails were granted the right to intervene in this matter. The settlement agreement remains in effect.
View Case Detail (JC-CA-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 25, 2018
Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center v. Ashford Hospitality Trust
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 4:15-cv-00216 (N.D. Cal.)
DR-CA-0054
Two individual plaintiffs, both of whom required wheelchairs for mobility, as well as the Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center brought this action for injunctive and declaratory relief against Ashford Hospitality Trust, Inc., an operator of hotels. The plaintiffs alleged violations of the ADA and the case settled with a requirement that the defendant hotels provide wheelchair-accessible shuttle services.
View Case Detail (DR-CA-0054)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 25, 2018
Duval Ranching Co. v. Glickman
Case Category: Environmental Justice
Trial Docket: CV-N-95-38-ECR (D. Nev.)
EJ-NV-0001
On January 20, 1995, plaintiffs filed a complaint in the District of Nevada alleging that various government officials and the Forest Service interfered with their rights in irrigation ditches. On March 14, 1997, Judge Edward C. Reed, Jr., dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims mainly on jurisdictional and procedural grounds, stating that the Forest Service had the legal authority to promulgate regulations governing national forest land and to regulate asserted rights of way.
View Case Detail (EJ-NV-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 25, 2018
Ball v. LeBlanc
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 3:13-cv-00368 (M.D. La.)
PC-LA-0014
In June 2013, death row inmates filed this suit in the Middle District of Louisiana against the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections and the Louisiana State Penitentiary, seeking declaratory ad injunctive relief. Plaintiffs alleged that their exposure to extreme seasonal heat posed serious health risks. In December 2013, the District Court found that this exposure amounted to cruel and unusual punishment and ordered the defendants to develop a plan to reduce and maintain a heat index at or below 88 degrees Fahrenheit in all death row tiers. On appeal, the Fifth Circuit upheld the liability finding, but found the District Court's injunction too broad and remanded for crafting an appropriately tailored injunction. As such, The District Court ordered that defendants comply with the "Third Plan." Plaintiffs and defendants continued to debate over whether the defendants were complying with the status quo, and plaintiffs sought further attorney's costs. The court denied this second request, using as basis a later special master expert report that affirmed defendants had indeed been in compliance. Meanwhile, defendants appealed the "Third Plan," stating that it violated the Fifth Circuit's prior judgment. The Fifth Circuit reversed and remanded.
View Case Detail (PC-LA-0014)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 25, 2018
Apsley v. Boeing Co.
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 6:05-cv-01368-EFM-KMH (D. Kan.)
EE-KS-0026
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (EE-KS-0026)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 25, 2018
United States v. Utah
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:11-cv-01072-SA (D. Utah)
IM-UT-0003
The Department of Justice filed this suit against the State of Utah on November 22, 2011, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division, challenging Utah's recently passed immigration bill, HB 497. It claimed that Sections 3, 10 and 11 of the law were preempted under the Supremacy Clause as an intrusion into the exclusively federal sphere of immigration, and preempted specifically by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101 et seq., and sought declaratory and injunctive relief. This case was immediately consolidated with a challenge brought earlier in the month by private plaintiffs, Utah Coalition of La Raza v. Herbert [IM-UT-0002]. See the entry on that case for all subsequent developments.
View Case Detail (IM-UT-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 24, 2018
M.M.M. v. Sessions
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-01832-DMS-MDD (S.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0130
Parents of minor child migrants sued on behalf of their children, saying the US government was depriving children of their independent right to seek asylum by coercing parents into waiving their children's right to removal proceedings and by denying those children credible fear interviews or the ability to be including in their parents' credible fear interviews.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0130)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 24, 2018
Strawser v. Strange
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 1:14-cv-00424 (S.D. Ala.)
PB-AL-0008
On September 11, 2014, two men married in their church, but not allowed to marry under Alabama law, filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, against the State of Alabama. The plaintiffs had applied, unsuccessfully, for a marriage license in Mobile County, Alabama. They argued that Alabama's ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional because it violated their rights to Due Process, Equal Protection, and the free exercise of religion. The District Court granted the plaintiffs preliminary injunctive relief, prohibiting the Alabama Attorney General from enforcing Alabama laws that ban same-sex marriage. The Court's order was stayed until February 9. The defendant appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court, both whom refused to extend the stay. As a result, on February 9, the district court order took effect: the ban on same-sex marriage was now illegal in Alabama, at least according to the federal courts. Many state probate judges refused to issue licenses, however, citing an order from the Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, and later a decision from that same court, requiring them not to issue same-sex marriage licenses. The case was stayed pending the outcome of Obergefell v. Hodges, which on June 26, 2015 held that the right to marry is fundamental, and that 14th Amendment does not allow states to ban same-sex marriage. On June 7, the district court judge ruled that the Alabama laws prohibiting same-sex marriage were unconstitutional, and issued a permanent injunction requiring the Alabama probate judges to issue same-sex marriage licenses.
View Case Detail (PB-AL-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 23, 2018
DOJ CRIPA Investigation of Patton State Hospital
Case Category: Mental Health (Facility)
Trial Docket: 2:06-cv-02667-GPS-E (C.D. Cal.)
MH-CA-0005
A 2006 DOJ findings letter to California's governor, advising him of the results of a previous investigation into the conditions and practices at Patton State Hospital, a facility for the mentally ill, led to a consent judgment. The consent judgment imposed minimally acceptable remedial measures that the state agreed to undertake. In 2011, Patton State Hospital was removed from the consent judgment, while other institutions remained under supervision until 2013.
View Case Detail (MH-CA-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 22, 2018
Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-03359-LB (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0122
On June 7, 2018, Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto and the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild filed this lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for failure to comply with a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request submitted on March 2, 2017. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0122)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 22, 2018
E.B. v. Department of Education
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 1:02-cv-05118 (E.D.N.Y.)
DR-NY-0013
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (DR-NY-0013)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 22, 2018
Johnson v. Wathen
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 7:02-cv-00087 (N.D. Tex.)
PC-TX-0008
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PC-TX-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 22, 2018
American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-03050-JCS (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0119
On May 23, 2018 the ACLU filed this lawsuit against Immigration and Customs Enforcement under the Freedom of Information Act, alleging that ICE had not provided the ACLU with documents they had requested related to ICE's purchase of automated license plate reader data. The parties have agreed to a schedule for the documents to be released on a rolling basis. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0119)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 20, 2018
EEOC v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE INC
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 3:06-cv-01453-JAP-TJB (D.N.J.)
EE-NJ-0100
The EEOC filed this lawsuit in federal court in New Jersey on behalf of a complainant alleging religious discrimination. A jury ruled in favor of the plaintiff, awarding compensatory damages, attorney's fees, and injunctive relief.
View Case Detail (EE-NJ-0100)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 19, 2018
EEOC v. KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:05-cv-02668-HGB-JCW (E.D. La.)
EE-LA-0045
EEOC sued the Kansas City Southern Railway Company for discriminatory and retaliatory conduct against its black employees on the basis race. After the plaintiffs appealed a lost summary judgment motion to the Fifth Circuit, the parties settled on remand. KCS agreed to provide training to its employees about employment discrimination and promised not to discriminate against any of its employees or applicants based on their race. The case is now closed.
View Case Detail (EE-LA-0045)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 19, 2018
Centro de la Comunidad Hispana v. Town of Oyster Bay
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:10-cv-02262-DRH-ARL (E.D.N.Y.)
IM-NY-0049
On May 18, 2010, two organizations comprised of day laborers and/or predominately Latino immigrant workers filed a class action lawsuit in the Eastern District Court of New York under the First and Fourteenth Amendments against the Town of Oyster Bay. The plaintiffs, represented by the ACLU and LatinoJustice PRLDEF, sought injunctive relief, declaratory relief, and attorneys' fees and costs, claiming that the defendants, through the passage of an ordinance prohibiting the solicitation of labor from the town's streets and sidewalks, unlawfully prohibited speech related to employment and had a discriminatory animus against predominately Latino immigrant day laborers. After defeating the defendant's partial motion for summary judgment due to lack of standing, plaintiff's motion for summary judgment was successful. On September 3, 2015, the District Court enjoined the ordinance and declared it unconstitutional as it violated the first amendment. On August 22, 2017, the Second Circuit affirmed the District Court's decision. As of October 17, 2018, parties were still litigating attorney's fees.
View Case Detail (IM-NY-0049)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 19, 2018
A.B.T. v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:11-cv-02108-RAJ (W.D. Wash.)
IM-WA-0019
In 2011, asylum applicants in removal proceedings filed a lawsuit against EOIR and USCIS challenging their practices for administering the asylum clock in removal proceedings. Plaintiffs alleged that the government's practices violated the U.S. Constitution, the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), the governing regulations, and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). On November 4, 2013, the court approved the parties' settlement agreement, which required USCIS and EOIR to make several changes to the method by which they calculated the 180-day waiting period for EAD eligibility for asylum applicants (often referred to as the "asylum clock").
View Case Detail (IM-WA-0019)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 18, 2018
Commonwealth v. Wagle
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 1613CR003391 (State Court)
CJ-MA-0003
An indigent woman in Massachusetts was jailed for being unable to pay her $250 bail after being charged with Possession of a Class A controlled substance. Represented by Equal Justice Under Law and Public Counsel Services in Massachusetts, she challenged her detention as unlawful for the State's failure to consider her ability to pay when setting her bail, effectively jailing her simply because she was poor. The reduced plaintiff's bail from $250 to $200, so her attorneys amended the petition to address the constitutional issues. The court ultimately denied relief on August 8, 2017. Because there has been no further activity on the docket, the case seems now to have ended, though it has not officially been closed.
View Case Detail (CJ-MA-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 18, 2018
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)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 18, 2018
EEOC v. GNLV Corp. d/b/a/ Golden Nugget
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:06-cv-01225-BES-PAL (D. Nev.)
EE-NV-0013
In 2006, employees of GNLV, Corp. filed this lawsuit through the EEOC, which alleged that the defendants discriminated and retaliated against their employees based on being black and/or female. In 2009, the court granted summary judgement to the defendant. The EEOC appealed and in 2011 the Ninth circuit reversed the motion for summary judgment. On remand in 2014, summary judgment was granted on three of the employees’ claims and granted and denied in part for the remaining three. Summary judgement was then granted and denied in part on the defendant’s affirmative defenses. In 2016, the parties reached a settlement as to the remaining claims, which required the defendants to pay monetary damages, comply with the Civil Rights Act, post a notice regarding employment discrimination, and hold employee training regarding discrimination and retaliation. The case is now closed.
View Case Detail (EE-NV-0013)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 17, 2018
United States v. City of Portland
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 3:12-cv-02265-SI (D. Or.)
PN-OR-0001
The U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against the City of Portland, Oregon, alleging that the Portland Police Bureau engaged in a practice of unconstitutional use of force against individuals with actual or perceived mental illness. On August 29, 2014, the Court entered a settlement agreement conditionally dismissing the case without prejudice. The implementation of the settlement agreement was subject to protracted negotiations, particularly concerning the scope of the periodic status conferences and the District Court's involvement. The parties twice went through Ninth Circuit mediation on these issues. As of October 17, 2018, the parties are still working toward full compliance under the settlement agreement.
View Case Detail (PN-OR-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 17, 2018
Briggs v. Montgomery
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 2:18-cv-02684 (D. Ariz.)
CJ-AZ-0003
On August 23, 2018, three Maricopa County, Arizona residents who have been referred to Maricopa County's Marijuana Diversion program filed this class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, Phoenix Division. The plaintiffs sought injunctive and monetary relief, claiming that the Maricopa County Attorney's Office and Treatment Assessment Screening Center jointly operate a marijuana possession diversion program that discriminates against the poor in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, and leads to unreasonable search and seizure in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on October 12, 2018 adding a third representative to the class. The case is ongoing as of October 17, 2018.
View Case Detail (CJ-AZ-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 17, 2018
Latif v. U.S. Department of Justice
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 3:10-cv-00750-BR (D. Or.)
NS-OR-0001
A group of citizens and lawful permanent residents contested their inclusion on the No Fly List on due process grounds. The U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon ordered the Department of Justice to develop new procedures allowing the plaintiffs to challenge their inclusion on the list, and dismissed the suit. The plaintiffs' appeal to the Ninth Circuit, arguing that the new procedures are insufficient, remains pending.
View Case Detail (NS-OR-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 17, 2018
Nwanguma v. Trump
Case Category: Presidential Authority
Trial Docket: 3:16-cv-00247-DJH-HBB (W.D. Ky.)
PR-KY-0001
On March 31, 2016, Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit in Jefferson Circuit Court (State Court, Kentucky). The case was later moved to the District Court of the United States, Western District of Kentucky. Plaintiffs sued Defendant Donald J. Trump, and Defendants H and B for assault and battery, as well as counts of incitement to riot, agency and vicarious liability, negligence, and punitive damages. The allegations are as such: Plaintiffs attended a presidential campaign rally for Defendant Donald J. Trump with the intention of peaceful protest. As Plaintiffs were protesting, Defendant Trump allegedly said “Get ‘em out of here,” following which Defendants H, B, and an unknown defendant physically attacked the Plaintiffs until they were forced to leave the rally. Defendant Trump also allegedly said “Don’t hurt ‘em. If I say ‘go get em,’ I get in trouble with the press, […]” Plaintiffs sought compensatory damages (for physical injury, humiliation, emotional distress, mental anguish), punitive damages, and pre-judgment and post-judgment interest and recovery of their costs. On May 20, 2016, Defendant Trump and B moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim, which the Court granted in part and denied in part on March 31, 2017. To this, Defendants moved for interlocutory appeal, which was granted on August 9, 2017. Defendant Trump also made a petition for a writ of mandamus, but this was dismissed as moot. On September 12, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit dismissed Plaintiff’s final claim of incitement to riot.
View Case Detail (PR-KY-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 16, 2018
Hollihan v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 3:15-cv-00005-EMK-SES (M.D. Pa.)
DR-PA-0008
In Jan. 2015, the plaintiff, an inmate, filed this putative class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, alleging that the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections systematically denied medical care to inmates with severe eye conditions, including severe cataracts, in violation of the ADA, § 504, and his Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. The parties settled, and the Department of Corrections changed their cataract policy, no longer denying inmates for surgery if they had "One Good Eye."
View Case Detail (DR-PA-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 16, 2018
N.T.C. v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-01626-DMS-JLB (S.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0128
On July 16, 2018, a group of minor children who recently came to the United States filed this putative class action lawsuit in the Southern District of New York, alleging that the government's policy of taking the plaintiff children away from their parents, crossing state lines, and not informing the parents where their children had been taken, violated their rights. Judge Swain immediately granted temporary relief and then Judge Furman transfered teh case to the Southern District of California.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0128)


CASE STUDIES
October 15, 2018
"Public-Private Conservation Agreements and the Greater Sage Grouse"
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Date: Oct. 15, 2018
By: Justin R. Pidot (University of Denver Sturm College of Law)
39 Pub. Land & Resources L. Rev. 161
The author, a former attorney with the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, discusses litigation related to threatened species relegated to the government's "precluded" list, including the Greater Sage Grouse. Differences between the Obama and Trump administrations with respect to conservation in this ...
View Case Study Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
October 15, 2018
Cedillo v. Transcor America LLC
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 3:13-cv-00869 (M.D. Tenn.)
PC-TN-0016
In April 2013, a group of pretrial detainees and prisoners filed this class action suit against a private prison transport company claiming the conditions under which detainees were transported were cruel and unusual; detainees were held, handcuffed and shackled, in cages too small to stand up or lie down in, denied adequate fluid, hygiene or medical care for as many as four days of travel. The plaintiffs were unnamed members of a previous class action which had been settled by the named plaintiffs only. The case was later settled between the company and plaintiffs.
View Case Detail (PC-TN-0016)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 14, 2018
"The Oyez Project, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 564 U.S. 338 (2011)."
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2010/10-277
Date: Oct. 14, 2018
By: Oyez Project (IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law)
Information about the Supreme Court litigation in this case, including audio recordings of the oral argument and opinion announcement, and the briefs and the docket and written opinion.*
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
October 14, 2018
Holmes v. Godinez
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:11-cv-02961 (N.D. Ill.)
PC-IL-0028
This is a class action filed by deaf and hard of hearing prisoners in the custody of the Illinois Department of Corrections, represented by a consortium of public interest and law firm lawyers. They allege systemic violation of their rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act to effective communication, rendering them isolated and unsafe in Illinois prisons. After extensive rounds of discovery and settlement negotiations, the parties reached a settlement agreement, which the court approved on July 26, 2018.
View Case Detail (PC-IL-0028)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 14, 2018
Johnson v. Jessup
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-00467 (M.D. N.C.)
CJ-NC-0008
Four low-income citizens facing permanent license revocation filed this class action in North Carolina federal court against the DMV under §1983. They alleged DMV violated Fourteenth Amendment Due Process because license revocation hearings did not provide an adequate inquiry into the plaintiffs' ability to pay. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (CJ-NC-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 13, 2018
Alicia B. v. Malloy
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 3:16-cv-00065 (D. Conn.)
ED-CT-0005
Two Connecticut plaintiffs are suing their respective public schools board of education and the State Board of Education for inadequate alternative education provided to expelled students. The Boards of Education and the State defendants have settled individually with the Plaintiffs. The State Department of Education agreed to develop and disclose several guidelines, as well as to implement and monitor the execution of several measures about the issues raised by the complaint.
View Case Detail (ED-CT-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 12, 2018
Edwards et al v. Leaders in Community Alternatives, Inc. et al
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-04609-JSC (N.D. Cal.)
CJ-CA-0022
Plaintiffs are individuals required to wear and pay for GPS ankle monitors by Alameda County. They seek class certification and relief. In October 2018 defendants filed a motion to dismiss. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (CJ-CA-0022)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 11, 2018
State v. Gregory
https://www.aclu-wa.org
Date: Oct. 11, 2018
By: ACLU of Washington (ACLU)
An ACLU amicus brief urges the Washington Supreme Court to strike down the state’s death penalty system for being arbitrary, unfair, and racially biased. Joining in the brief are 56 former and retired judges from around the state, an organization representing murder victims’ families, faith ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 10, 2018
EPIC.org U.S. v. Moalin
General background, news articles, and additional filings related to this case.*
View Link Detail  


CASE STUDIES
October 6, 2018
"Case Studies in Emergency Election Litigation: The Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity"
The Federal Judicial
Date: Sep. 25, 2018
By: Robert Timothy Reagan (Federal Judicial Center)
In mid-2017, President Trump created the Presidential Advisory
Commission on Election Integrity. The commission’s vice chair
asked all states to submit extensive voter registration data to the
commission. Following states’ reluctance to comply and lawsuits
challenging ...
View Case Study Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 3, 2018
Banished
The Marshall Project; Longreads
Date: 10/3/2018
By: Beth Schwartzapfel and Emily Kassie (The Marshall Project; Longreads)
A long-form article covering the impact of Miami-Dade County's restrictive housing laws on registered sex offenders.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 23, 2018
Selma and the Liuzzo Murder Trials: The First Modern Civil Rights Convictions
Date: 2018
By: Jim Turner
This is the on-line annex to a book by Jim Turner, with case documents.

In 1965 the drive for black voting rights in the south culminated in the epic Selma to Montgomery Freedom March. After brutal state police beatings stunned the nation on "Bloody Sunday," troops under federal court ...
View Link Detail