Case: Roshan v. Smith

1:84-02176 | U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

Filed Date: July 18, 1984

Closed Date: Aug. 6, 1985

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

In 1984, plaintiffs, who included 23 aliens detained at various INS facilities pending deportation, 17 attorneys, and 12 immigration advocacy groups, filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to prevent completion and operation of an Alien Detention Center (ADC) under construction in Oakdale, Louisiana. The center was intended to house one thousand aliens detained by the INS and have an expansion capacity to provide emergency temporary housing for two to three thousand…

In 1984, plaintiffs, who included 23 aliens detained at various INS facilities pending deportation, 17 attorneys, and 12 immigration advocacy groups, filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to prevent completion and operation of an Alien Detention Center (ADC) under construction in Oakdale, Louisiana. The center was intended to house one thousand aliens detained by the INS and have an expansion capacity to provide emergency temporary housing for two to three thousand more aliens. The plaintiff detainees alleged that because of ADC's size and rural location they would be detained and denied their constitutional and statutory right to counsel and access to the legal process as guaranteed under the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1362, the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 555(b), and the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. They further alleged environmental irregularities at the construction site in violation of the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. § 4321. The plaintiff attorneys and advocacy groups alleged violations of their First Amendment rights to counsel current clients and to solicit and advise prospective clients.

The government moved to dismiss, or in alternative, for summary judgment.

The District Court (Judge Thomas F. Hogan) granted the government's motion and held that: (1) alien detainees' claims were not ripe for review; (2) alien detainees lacked standing to bring suit; (3) attorney-plaintiffs and advocacy organizations lacked standing to bring suit, and (4) attorney-plaintiffs and advocacy organizations failed to state cause of action under First Amendment. Roshan v. Smith, 615 F.Supp. 901 (D.D.C. 1985). The case was dismissed. We have no record of an appeal or further proceedings.

Summary Authors

Dan Dalton (10/22/2007)

People


Judge(s)

Hogan, Thomas Francis (District of Columbia)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Davis, Robert S. (New York)

Gutentag, Lucas (New York)

Helton, Arthur C. (New York)

McAvoy, John J. (District of Columbia)

Quigley, William Patrick (Louisiana)

Robb, Harriet (New York)

Ross, Rebecca L. (District of Columbia)

Spitzer, Arthur (District of Columbia)

Judge(s)

Hogan, Thomas Francis (District of Columbia)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Davis, Robert S. (New York)

Gutentag, Lucas (New York)

Helton, Arthur C. (New York)

McAvoy, John J. (District of Columbia)

Quigley, William Patrick (Louisiana)

Robb, Harriet (New York)

Ross, Rebecca L. (District of Columbia)

Spitzer, Arthur (District of Columbia)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

1:84-02176

Memorandum Opinion

615 F.Supp. 901

Aug. 6, 1985

Aug. 6, 1985

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

Last updated Aug. 11, 2022, 3:08 a.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

Case Details

State / Territory: District of Columbia

Case Type(s):

Immigration and/or the Border

Key Dates

Filing Date: July 18, 1984

Closing Date: Aug. 6, 1985

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

23 individuals detained at various INS facilities throughout the U.S. and who are potentially excludable or deportable aliens, as well as 17 attorneys, and 12 advocacy and service organizations that represent counsel detainees in immigration proceedings.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

ACLU National (all projects)

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Immigration and Naturalization Service, Federal

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq.

Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101 et seq.

Availably Documents:

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Issues

General:

Conditions of confinement

Immigration/Border:

Constitutional rights

Detention - conditions

Immigration lawyers