Case: Arpaio v. Obama

1:14-cv-01966 | U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

Filed Date: Nov. 20, 2014

Closed Date: 2015

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On November 20, 2014, Joe Arpaio, the Sheriff of Maricopa County in Arizona, filed this lawsuit in the D.C. District Court against President Obama, the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and the U.S. Attorney General. Sheriff Arpaio sued under the Declaratory Judgment Act(28 U.S.C. § 2201) and the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). Represented by private counsel, the plaintiff claimed that two federal programs cons…

On November 20, 2014, Joe Arpaio, the Sheriff of Maricopa County in Arizona, filed this lawsuit in the D.C. District Court against President Obama, the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and the U.S. Attorney General. Sheriff Arpaio sued under the Declaratory Judgment Act(28 U.S.C. § 2201) and the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). Represented by private counsel, the plaintiff claimed that two federal programs constituted unconstitutional abuses of the President's power:

1) The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program started on June 15, 2012; and

2) Several additional programs-- referred to by the plaintiff as Executive Order Amnesty (EOA) programs-- started on November 20, 2014

DACA allowed some undocumented immigrants who were brought to the United States as children to receive a renewable two-year period of deferred action from deportation and become eligible for a work permit in the U.S. EOA extended DACA to defer action for childhood arrivals who arrived after the earliest cut-off date and for parents and other relatives of U.S. citizens or persons lawfully present.

Specifically, Sheriff Arpaio claimed that the challenged programs constituted a dramatic departure from prior interpretation and application of existing law and regulations and that the President cannot effect these changes by Executive Order. Plaintiff also argued that even if the Court deemed these dramatic changes constitutional, the challenged programs should have gone through notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures under the APA. Alternatively, Plaintiff challenged these actions pursuant to the APA as unlawful and invalid as arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, unreasonable, and/or otherwise not in accordance with law.

On December 4, 2014, Plaintiff sought a Preliminary Injunction and filed a brief, which the court construed as a motion to dismiss. On December 23, 2014, District Judge Beryl A. Howell denied the preliminary injunction and dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Judge Howell found that the plaintiff did not suffer a legally cognizable injury, and thus held that the Plaintiff lacked standing. Sheriff Arpaio, the Court explained, did not suffer injury in fact in his personal capacity because he sought to vindicate only a general interest in proper application of Constitution and laws. Although he alleged that undocumented immigrants had targeted him for assassination as a result of his stance on illegal immigration, neither of the challenged programs threatened the sheriff's life; in fact, his stance on illegal immigration existed prior to this case and the challenged programs. In addition, Sheriff Arpaio did not suffer injury in fact in his official capacity because he was asserting generalized grievances against federal policy and alleged injuries were largely speculative. The plaintiff also failed to show causation because neither challenged program authorized the conduct of which he complained. Arpaio v. Obama, 27 F.Supp.3d 185 (D.D.C. 2014).

On December 29, 2014, Plaintiff appealed to the D.C. Circuit Court. On August 14, 2015, the D.C. Circuit affirmed the judgment of the District Court in an opinion by Judge Cornelia T.L. Pillard. This ended the case.

Summary Authors

Frances Hollander (11/1/2015)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attrorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5128962/parties/arpaio-v-obama/


Judge(s)

Brown, Janice Rogers (District of Columbia)

Howell, Beryl Alaine (District of Columbia)

Pillard, Cornelia Thayer Livingston (New York)

Srinivasan, Srikanth (District of Columbia)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Klayman, Larry (District of Columbia)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Bladuell, Hector G. (District of Columbia)

Branda, Joyce R. (District of Columbia)

Brinkmann, Beth S (District of Columbia)

Clair, Jeffrey (District of Columbia)

Cohen, Bradley H. (District of Columbia)

Judge(s)

Brown, Janice Rogers (District of Columbia)

Howell, Beryl Alaine (District of Columbia)

Pillard, Cornelia Thayer Livingston (New York)

Srinivasan, Srikanth (District of Columbia)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Klayman, Larry (District of Columbia)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Bladuell, Hector G. (District of Columbia)

Branda, Joyce R. (District of Columbia)

Brinkmann, Beth S (District of Columbia)

Clair, Jeffrey (District of Columbia)

Cohen, Bradley H. (District of Columbia)

Freeny, Kyle Renee (District of Columbia)

Hartnett, Kathleen R. (District of Columbia)

Kelleher, Diane (District of Columbia)

Kirschner, Adam D. (District of Columbia)

Machen, Ronald C (District of Columbia)

McIntosh, Scott R. (District of Columbia)

Mizer, Benjamin C. (District of Columbia)

Saltman, Julie Shana (District of Columbia)

Expert/Monitor/Master

Havemann, William Ernest (District of Columbia)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

1:14-cv-01966

General Docket

Joseph Arpaio v. Barack Obama, et al.

Sept. 3, 2015

Sept. 3, 2015

Docket
1

1:14-cv-01966

Civil Complaint

Nov. 20, 2014

Nov. 20, 2014

Complaint
15

1:14-cv-01966

Notice

Dec. 17, 2014

Dec. 17, 2014

Notice Letter
23

1:14-cv-01966

Memorandum Opinion

27 F.Supp.3d 185, 2014 WL 7278815, 2014 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 176758

Dec. 23, 2014

Dec. 23, 2014

Order/Opinion
1567834

14-05325

Opinion for the Court Filed by Circuit Judge Pillard Concurring Opinion Filed by Circuit Judge Brown

U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

797 F.3d 11, 2015 WL 4772774, 2015 U.S.App.LEXIS 14270

Aug. 14, 2015

Aug. 14, 2015

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5128962/arpaio-v-obama/

Last updated Aug. 2, 2022, 3:19 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0090-3912973) filed by JOSEPH M. ARPAIO. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Civil Cover Sheet, # 5 Summons, # 6 Summons, # 7 Summons, # 8 Summons)(Klayman, Larry) (Entered: 11/20/2014)

Nov. 20, 2014

Nov. 20, 2014

PACER
2

SUMMONS (4) Issued Electronically as to ERIC HOLDER, JR., JEH CHARLES JOHNSON, BARACK OBAMA, LEON RODRIQUEZ. (Attachments: # 1 Summons, # 2 Summons, # 3 Summons, # 4 Summons)(sth, ) (Entered: 11/21/2014)

Nov. 21, 2014

Nov. 21, 2014

3

STANDING ORDER. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on November 21, 2014. (lcbah2) (Entered: 11/21/2014)

Nov. 21, 2014

Nov. 21, 2014

MINUTE ORDER (paperless) DIRECTING the plaintiff to comply with Local Civil Rule 65.1, which requires applications for preliminary injunctions and temporary restraining orders to be made in a motion "separate from the complaint," if the plaintiff intends to seek such extraordinary relief. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on November 24, 2014. (lcbah2) (Entered: 11/24/2014)

Nov. 24, 2014

Nov. 24, 2014

4

REQUEST FOR SUMMONS TO ISSUE by JOSEPH M. ARPAIO re 1 Complaint, filed by JOSEPH M. ARPAIO. Related document: 1 Complaint, filed by JOSEPH M. ARPAIO. (Attachments: # 1 Summons)(Klayman, Larry) (Entered: 11/24/2014)

Nov. 24, 2014

Nov. 24, 2014

5

SUMMONS (2) Issued Electronically as to ERIC HOLDER, JR., BARACK OBAMA, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (jf, ) (Entered: 11/25/2014)

Nov. 25, 2014

Nov. 25, 2014

6

MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by JOSEPH M. ARPAIO (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Exhibit I, # 10 Exhibit J, # 11 Exhibit K, # 12 Exhibit L)(Klayman, Larry) (Entered: 12/04/2014)

Dec. 4, 2014

Dec. 4, 2014

7

MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by JOSEPH M. ARPAIO (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Exhibit I, # 10 Exhibit J, # 11 Exhibit K, # 12 Exhibit L)(Klayman, Larry) (Entered: 12/04/2014)

Dec. 4, 2014

Dec. 4, 2014

8

ORDER Controlling Preliminary Injunction Proceedings. The plaintiff shall, by 5:00 p.m. on December 9, 2014, submit (1) proof of service of the 1 Complaint and 6 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; and (2) a joint proposed schedule to govern the preliminary injunction proceedings. See Order for further details. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on December 1, 2014. (lcbah2) (Entered: 12/04/2014)

Dec. 4, 2014

Dec. 4, 2014

9

NOTICE Praecipe by JOSEPH M. ARPAIO re 8 Order, (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1)(Klayman, Larry) (Entered: 12/05/2014)

Dec. 5, 2014

Dec. 5, 2014

10

NOTICE of Appearance by Adam D. Kirschner on behalf of All Defendants (Kirschner, Adam) (Entered: 12/06/2014)

Dec. 6, 2014

Dec. 6, 2014

11

RESPONSE re 9 Notice (Other) filed by ERIC HOLDER, JR., JEH CHARLES JOHNSON, BARACK OBAMA, LEON RODRIQUEZ. (Kirschner, Adam) (Entered: 12/06/2014)

Dec. 6, 2014

Dec. 6, 2014

12

RESPONSE TO ORDER OF THE COURT re 8 Order, filed by JOSEPH M. ARPAIO. (Klayman, Larry) (Entered: 12/09/2014)

Dec. 9, 2014

Dec. 9, 2014

MINUTE ORDER (paperless) ISSUING the following SCHEDULING ORDER to control the timing and consideration of the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction. The plaintiff's 12 Statement on Briefing Scheduling of Motion for Preliminary Injunction indicates that the parties have been unable to agree to a joint briefing schedule and, consequently, under LCvR 65.1, "[t]he opposition shall be served and filed within seven days after service of the application for preliminary injunction." LCvR 65.1 does not provide for the submission of a reply brief. Accordingly, the defendants are directed to file their opposition, including any objections based on "the significant jurisdictional issues raised by plaintiff's lawsuit," to the plaintiff's 6 Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Request for Oral Argument Thereon by December 15, 2014. The parties shall appear on December 22, 2014 at 9:30 AM, in Courtroom 15, for a hearing regarding the plaintiff's 6 Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Request for Oral Argument Thereon. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on December 10, 2014. (lcbah2) (Entered: 12/10/2014)

Dec. 10, 2014

Dec. 10, 2014

Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings: Opposition to 6 Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Request for Oral Argument Thereon due by 12/15/2014. Hearing on the Motion for Preliminary Injuction scheduled for 12/22/2014 at 9:30 AM in Courtroom 15 before Judge Beryl A. Howell. (tg, ) (Entered: 12/10/2014)

Dec. 10, 2014

Dec. 10, 2014

13

Memorandum in opposition to re 7 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction , 6 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by ERIC HOLDER, JR., JEH CHARLES JOHNSON, BARACK OBAMA, LEON RODRIQUEZ. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8, # 9 Exhibit 9, # 10 Exhibit 10, # 11 Exhibit 11, # 12 Exhibit 12, # 13 Exhibit 13, # 14 Exhibit 14, # 15 Exhibit 15, # 16 Exhibit 16, # 17 Exhibit 17, # 18 Exhibit 18, # 19 Exhibit 19, # 20 Exhibit 20, # 21 Exhibit 21, # 22 Exhibit 22, # 23 Exhibit 23, # 24 Exhibit 24, # 25 Text of Proposed Order)(Kirschner, Adam) (Entered: 12/15/2014)

Dec. 15, 2014

Dec. 15, 2014

MINUTE ORDER (paperless) TO SHOW CAUSE why the defendants' 13 Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction ("Defs.' Opposition") should not be construed as a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1). The defendants shall file a notice with the Court by 12:00 PM on December 17, 2014 explaining whether their opposition should be construed as a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(1). The plaintiff may file a reply in light of the issues raised by Defs.' Opposition by 5:00 PM on December 18, 2014. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on December 16, 2014. (lcbah2) (Entered: 12/16/2014)

Dec. 16, 2014

Dec. 16, 2014

Set/Reset Deadlines: Response to Show Cause due by 12:00 PM on 12/17/2014; Reply due by 5:00 PM on 12/18/2014. (tg, ) (Entered: 12/16/2014)

Dec. 16, 2014

Dec. 16, 2014

14

NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY by JOSEPH M. ARPAIO (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1)(Klayman, Larry) (Entered: 12/16/2014)

Dec. 16, 2014

Dec. 16, 2014

15

NOTICE re Minute Order by ERIC HOLDER, JR., JEH CHARLES JOHNSON, BARACK OBAMA, LEON RODRIQUEZ re Order,, (Kirschner, Adam) (Entered: 12/17/2014)

Dec. 17, 2014

Dec. 17, 2014

16

Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Reply by JOSEPH M. ARPAIO (Klayman, Larry) (Entered: 12/17/2014)

Dec. 17, 2014

Dec. 17, 2014

MINUTE ORDER (paperless) GRANTING the plaintiff's 16 Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply. The plaintiff shall have until 8:00 PM on December 18, 2014 to file his reply. The plaintiff's 17 Request for Live Testimony is DENIED as the testimony will result in the "needless presentation of cumulative evidence," see LCvR 65(1)(d), since, at this stage of the proceedings, in opposition to the defendants' motion to dismiss, the Court need not make any credibility determinations and must accept as true the factual allegations made by the plaintiff. Any evidence the plaintiff wished the Court to hear by live testimony may be presented instead in a sworn declaration supplementing the plaintiff's previous declaration. See Decl. of Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Ex. G, ECF No. 6 . Accordingly, the plaintiff has leave to file a supplemental declaration setting forth those facts the plaintiff would have otherwise presented during live testimony by 5:00 PM on December 19, 2014. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on December 18, 2014. (lcbah2) (Entered: 12/18/2014)

Dec. 18, 2014

Dec. 18, 2014

Set/Reset Deadlines: Plaintiff's Reply due by 8:00 PM on 12/18/2014. Plaintiff's Sworn Supplemental Declaration due by 5:00 PM on 12/19/2014. (tg, ) (Entered: 12/18/2014)

Dec. 18, 2014

Dec. 18, 2014

18

Unopposed MOTION to Increase Page Limit re Order,, by JOSEPH M. ARPAIO (Klayman, Larry) (Entered: 12/18/2014)

Dec. 18, 2014

Dec. 18, 2014

MINUTE ORDER (paperless) GRANTING the plaintiff's 18 Unopposed Motion to Increase Page Limit. The plaintiff shall have an additional fifteen pages for his Reply. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on December 18, 2014. (lcbah2) (Entered: 12/18/2014)

Dec. 18, 2014

Dec. 18, 2014

19

REPLY to opposition to motion re 7 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by JOSEPH M. ARPAIO. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C)(Klayman, Larry) (Entered: 12/18/2014)

Dec. 18, 2014

Dec. 18, 2014

20

NOTICE of Filing of Supplemental Declaration of Sheriff Joe Arpaio, in Support of Plaintiffs Motion for Injunction by JOSEPH M. ARPAIO re Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File,,,, (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Sheriff Joe Arpaio, In Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Injunction)(Klayman, Larry) (Entered: 12/19/2014)

Dec. 19, 2014

Dec. 19, 2014

21

NOTICE of Filing of Document to be Included as Part of Exhibit 5 by JOSEPH M. ARPAIO re 20 Notice (Other), (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Klayman, Larry) (Entered: 12/21/2014)

Dec. 21, 2014

Dec. 21, 2014

22

NOTICE of Appearance by Kathleen Roberta Hartnett on behalf of All Defendants (Hartnett, Kathleen) (Entered: 12/21/2014)

Dec. 21, 2014

Dec. 21, 2014

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Beryl A. Howell: Hearing on a Motion for Preliminary Injunction held on 12/22/2014. (Court Reporter Barbara DeVico.) (tg, ) (Entered: 12/22/2014)

Dec. 22, 2014

Dec. 22, 2014

24

ORDER GRANTING the defendants' Motion to Dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and DENYING the plaintiff's 6 , 7 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the case. See Order for further details. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on December 23, 2014. (lcbah3) (Entered: 12/23/2014)

Dec. 23, 2014

Dec. 23, 2014

25

NOTICE OF APPEAL TO DC CIRCUIT COURT as to 23 Memorandum & Opinion, 24 Order, by JOSEPH M. ARPAIO. Filing fee $ 505, receipt number 0090−3945815. Fee Status: Fee Paid. Parties have been notified. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2)(Klayman, Larry) (Entered: 12/23/2014)

Dec. 23, 2014

Dec. 23, 2014

26

Transmission of the Notice of Appeal, Order Appealed, and Docket Sheet to US Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals fee was paid this date re 25 Notice of Appeal to DC Circuit Court. (rdj) (Entered: 12/24/2014)

Dec. 24, 2014

Dec. 24, 2014

27

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS before Judge Beryl A. Howell held on 12−22−14; Page Numbers: 1−60. Date of Issuance:12−29−14. Court Reporter/Transcriber Barbara DeVico, Telephone number 202−354−3118, Court Reporter Email Address : Barbara_DeVico@dcd.uscourts.gov.<P></P>For the first 90 days after this filing date, the transcript may be viewed at the courthouse at a public terminal or purchased from the court reporter referenced above. After 90 days, the transcript may be accessed via PACER. Other transcript formats, (multi−page, condensed or ASCII) may be purchased from the court reporter.<P> NOTICE RE REDACTION OF TRANSCRIPTS: The parties have twenty−one days to file with the court and the court reporter any request to redact personal identifiers from this transcript. If no such requests are filed, the transcript will be made available to the public via PACER without redaction after 90 days. The policy, which includes the five personal identifiers specifically covered, is located on our website at ww.dcd.uscourts.gov.<P></P> Redaction Request due 1/19/2015. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 1/29/2015. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 3/29/2015.(DeVico, Barbara) (Entered: 12/29/2014)

Dec. 29, 2014

Dec. 29, 2014

28

MANDATE of USCA (certified copy) as to 25 Notice of Appeal to DC Circuit Court, filed by JOSEPH M. ARPAIO. ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the judgment of the District Court appealed from in this cause is hereby affirmed, in accordance with the opinion of the court filed herein this date. USCA Case Number 14−5325. (md) (Entered: 09/08/2015)

Sept. 8, 2015

Sept. 8, 2015

23

MEMORANDUM OPINION regarding the plaintiff's 6 , 7 Motion for Preliminary Injunction and the defendants' Motion to Dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on December 23, 2014. (lcbah3)

Dec. 23, 2014

Dec. 23, 2014

RECAP

Case Details

State / Territory: District of Columbia

Case Type(s):

Immigration and/or the Border

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Nov. 20, 2014

Closing Date: 2015

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona.

Plaintiff Type(s):

City/County Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

President of the United States, Federal

Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Federal

Director of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal

U.S. Attorney General, Federal

Case Details

Causes of Action:

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

Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Content of Injunction:

Preliminary relief denied

Issues

General:

Government Services

Benefit Source:

DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals)

Immigration/Border:

Deportation - procedure

Status/Classification

Undocumented immigrants - rights and duties

Undocumented immigrants - state and local regulation

Work authorization - criteria