Support the Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse?

The Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse is committed to making information about civil rights lawsuits public, accessible, and free. If you use our--recently revamped--website and the posted documents and information, would you consider a donation? Our small but mighty team relies principally on grant funding and donations. Can you help?

Support the Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse?

The Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse is committed to making information about civil rights lawsuits public, accessible, and free. If you use our--recently revamped--website and the posted documents and information, would you consider a donation? Our small but mighty team relies principally on grant funding and donations. Can you help?

Thank you!

DONATE

Case: City and County of San Francisco v. Trump

3:17-cv-00485 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Filed Date: Jan. 31, 2017

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This lawsuit, filed by the City of San Francisco on January 31, 2017, challenges President Trump’s January 25, 2017 Executive Order on immigration enforcement, which threatened to withhold federal funds from "sanctuary jurisdictions" and take enforcement action against any locality that impedes the federal government's immigration law. The City filed its complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The complaint argued that this issue was one of "state sovereign…

This lawsuit, filed by the City of San Francisco on January 31, 2017, challenges President Trump’s January 25, 2017 Executive Order on immigration enforcement, which threatened to withhold federal funds from "sanctuary jurisdictions" and take enforcement action against any locality that impedes the federal government's immigration law. The City filed its complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

The complaint argued that this issue was one of "state sovereignty and a local government’s autonomy to devote resources to local priorities and to control the exercise of its own police powers, rather than being forced to carry out the agenda of the Federal government." Thus, the plaintiff alleged that the executive order violated the Tenth Amendment. The complaint addressed 8 U.S.C. § 1373, which provides that a local government entity cannot prohibit or restrict communication between government entities or officials and the Immigration and Naturalization Service. After asserting its compliance with the statute, the complaint alleged that the U.S. had begun to designate non-compliant cities as sanctuary cities and that San Francisco had been designated as such. The complaint asserted that §1373 unconstitutionally regulated state governments and that San Francisco stood to be harmed by the executive order.

The complaint sought declaratory and injunctive relief. Specifically, the plaintiff asked for a declaration that San Francisco complies with 8 U.S.C. § 1373, that 8 U.S.C. § 1373(a) violates the Tenth Amendment, and that the executive order's enforcement directive violates the Tenth Amendment. The case was initially assigned to Magistrate Judge Donna Ryu, but on February 10, Judge William Orrick granted a motion to relate this case to County of Santa Clara v. Trump, IM-CA-0089 in this Clearinghouse, and reassigned this case to himself. On February 27, the plaintiff filed a first amended complaint. The amended complaint added that San Francisco seeks a declaration that the EO's funding restrictions violate the Tenth Amendment, the Spending Clause, and Article I, sec. 1 of the Constitution.

On March 8, the plaintiff filed a motion for a preliminary injunction. In the motion, the plaintiff requested that the court enter a nationwide preliminary injunction prohibiting the defendants from enforcing the executive order. The plaintiff also sought to enjoin the defendants from taking any action that would declare San Francisco a sanctuary city, thereby making the city ineligible for federal funds. On March 23, the city of Richmond moved to relate this case to Richmond v. Trump (IM-CA-0090 in this Clearinghouse), which had been filed on March 21 in the same court. The court granted the motion on March 23. Several individuals and organizations have filed amici briefs in support of the plaintiff including the State of California, a local chapter of the NAACP, and several Silicon Valley technology companies. After an April 14 hearing, the Court, on April 25, entered a nationwide injunction against operation of the Order.

The court explained that the federal government at the hearing had disavowed a robust reading of the Executive Order:

It explained for the first time at oral argument that the Order is merely an exercise of the President’s “bully pulpit” to highlight a changed approach to immigration enforcement. Under this interpretation, Section 9(a) applies only to three federal grants in the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security that already have conditions requiring compliance with 8 U.S.C. 1373. This interpretation renders the Order toothless; the Government can already enforce these three grants by the terms of those grants and can enforce 8 U.S.C. 1373 to the extent legally possible under the terms of existing law. Counsel disavowed any right through the Order for the Government to affect any other part of the billions of dollars in federal funds the Counties receive every year.
The Court held, however, that the Executive Order "is not reasonably susceptible to the new, narrow interpretation offered at the hearing."

Yet a broader reading was, Judge Orrick explained, unconstitutional: "The Constitution vests the spending powers in Congress, not the President, so the Order cannot constitutionally place new conditions on federal funds. Further, the Tenth Amendment requires that conditions on federal funds be unambiguous and timely made; that they bear some relation to the funds at issue; and that the total financial incentive not be coercive. Federal funding that bears no meaningful relationship to immigration enforcement cannot be threatened merely because a jurisdiction chooses an immigration enforcement strategy of which the President disapproves."

Accordingly, the Court granted a preliminary injunction against any broader implementation of the order, although it emphasized that the preliminary injunction "does not affect the ability of the Attorney General or the Secretary to enforce existing conditions of federal grants or 8 U.S.C. 1373, nor does it impact the Secretary’s ability to develop regulations or other guidance defining what a sanctuary jurisdiction is or designating a jurisdiction as such." County of Santa Clara v. Trump, 250 F. Supp. 3d 497 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 25, 2017).

The government moved for reconsideration pursuant to a May 22, 2017 memorandum from the Attorney General regarding the implementation of the EO. The memo specified that "the Department of Justice will require jurisdictions applying for certain Department grants to certify their compliance with federal law, including 8 U.S.C. § 1373, as a condition for receiving an award. This certification requirement will apply to any existing grant administered by the Office of Justice Programs and the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services that expressly contains this certification condition and to future grants for which the Department is statutorily authorized to impose such a condition. All grantees will receive notice of their obligation to comply with section 1373." Further, "the term 'sanctuary jurisdiction' will refer only to jurisdictions that 'willfully refuse to comply with 8 U.S.C. 1373.'" On May 23, the plaintiff filed a second amended complaint. The defendants moved to dismiss on June 6. On July 6, the plaintiff Santa Clara (followed by joinders from San Francisco and Richmond on July 7) moved for leave to file a surreply in opposition to the motion to dismiss. The plaintiffs argued that recent statements by President Trump and DHS officials contradicted assertions in the defendants' reply brief. On July 12, the plaintiff also filed a supplemental request for judicial notice of recent statements by AG Sessions.

On June 16, 2017, the states of West Virginia, Louisiana, Alabama, Arkansas, Michigan, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas moved for leave to file an amicus brief in support of the defendants' motion to dismiss. On June 28, 2017, many organizations, including labor unions, civil rights groups, and public schools, as well as individual sheriffs and police chiefs, moved to file amici briefs in support of the plaintiff's opposition to the defendants' motion to discuss.

On July 12, 2017, Judge Orrick held a hearing (in all three related cases) on the defendants' motions to dismiss and motion for reconsideration. He issued an order on July 20, denying the defendants' motions. He denied the motion for reconsideration because the AG Memorandum did not change the analysis from the preliminary injunction order. Additionally, he denied the motion to dismiss because the AG Memorandum did not change his findings of the plaintiff's standing and their claims' ripeness and likelihood of success. Finally, he concluded that the plaintiff had adequately stated a claim for declaratory relief. County of Santa Clara v. Trump, 2017 WL 3086064 (N.D. Cal. July 20, 2017).

On August 15 and 17, 2017, the plaintiff in an administrative motion and supplemental statement asked the court to relate City and County of San Francisco v. Trump to City and County of San Francisco v. Sessions. The plaintiff argued that both cases concerned substantially the same parties and challenged the President's withholding of federal funds from sanctuary cities. On August 18, 2017, the defendants responded, arguing that the cases should not be related because the first challenged an EO and the latter an AG program. On August 23, 2017, Judge Orrick granted the plaintiff's request to relate this case to City and County of San Francisco v. Sessions. Then on August 25, 2017, he found State of California v. Sessions to be a related case, and reassigned it to himself. That case also challenges DOJ's immigration-related conditions on law enforcement funding.

On August 30, 2017 San Francisco and Santa Clara moved for summary judgment. San Francisco argued that the EO was unconstitutional because it violated the separation of powers, the Spending Clause, and the Tenth Amendment. Consequently, San Francisco argued, the court should permanently enjoin the EO's implementation. The defendants, in their September 27, 2017 response, argued that the Constitution authorized their broad immigration enforcement powers as implemented in the EO and § 1373. On September 18, 2017 the defendants appealed, to the Ninth Circuit, Judge Orrick's April 25, 2017 preliminary injunction and July 20, 2017 order denying the defendants' motions to dismiss and motion for reconsideration. The Ninth Circuit opened a docket for the appeal, No. 17-16886. The Ninth Circuit held oral argument on April 11. In the district court, Judge Orrick held an October 23 hearing on the plaintiffs' August 30 motion for summary judgment. On November 20, he granted summary judgment for the plaintiffs, permanently enjoining the defendants from enforcing Section 9(a) of the EO against all jurisdictions deemed as "sanctuary jurisdictions." The injunction applied nationwide because Section 9(a) was facially unconstitutional.

In his opinion, Judge Orrick held that the EO had caused and would continue to cause constitutional injuries, by violating the separation of powers doctrine and depriving the plaintiffs of their Fifth and Tenth Amendment rights. Judge Orrick first stated that the EO's plain language impermissibly empowers the President to place new conditions on all federal funds -- a power properly reserved to Congress under the Spending Clause. The President's and AG's subsequent comments on the EO had confirmed, rather than narrowed, this broad scope. Further, the Fifth and Tenth Amendments forbid funding conditions that are vague, unrelated to the funds at issue, and coercive: "Federal funding that bears no meaningful relationship to immigration enforcement cannot be threatened merely because a jurisdiction chooses an immigration enforcement strategy of which the President disapproves."

On November 29, 2017 the parties jointly requested that the Court dismiss San Francisco's claim for declaratory judgment (that it did not violate § 1373), which the Court would consider instead in San Francisco v. Sessions. The next day, Judge Orrick granted this request. On December 14, 2017 the defendants appealed Judge Orrick's November 20 permanent injunction, asking the Ninth Circuit to consolidate this appeal with the other two appeals in process. The plaintiffs, for their part, asked the Ninth Circuit to dismiss the consolidated appeals as moot because they challenged a preliminary injunction that the permanent injunction had superseded. The defendants responded on December 27. Eleven states filed a December 22, 2017 amicus brief supporting the defendants. However, the Ninth Circuit granted the plaintiffs' request on January 4, denying all pending motions as moot.

The Ninth Circuit held oral argument on April 11, 2018. On August 1, 2018 the Ninth Circuit affirmed the grant of summary judgment, but vacated and remanded for reconsideration of the nationwide injunction. The panel held that the executive branch could not refuse to disperse the federal grants without congressional authorization under the Separation of Powers principle and the Spending Clause. The panel found that Congress had not so authorized, and so summary judgment was proper, but that there were no findings to support an injunction with nationwide reach. 2018 WL 3637911.

On August 29, 2018 the plaintiff in an administrative motion asked the court to relate City and County of San Francisco v. Sessions III and State of California v. Sessions. The defendants did not oppose the motion. On September 10, 2018, the court related the cases to this case.

On August 15, 2019, by the plaintiffs' stipulation, the court dismissed the plaintiffs' request for a nationwide injunction and closed the case.

Summary Authors

Ava Morgenstern (4/14/2018)

Jamie Kessler (5/29/2017)

Virginia Weeks (9/26/2018)

Related Cases

County of Santa Clara v. Trump, Northern District of California (2017)

City of Richmond v. Trump, Northern District of California (2017)

City and County of San Francisco v. Sessions, Northern District of California (2017)

State of California v. Sessions, Northern District of California (2017)

City and County of San Francisco v. Sessions III, Northern District of California (2018)

State of California v. Sessions, Northern District of California (2018)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attrorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4578395/parties/city-and-county-of-san-francisco-v-donald-j-trump/


Judge(s)

Orrick, William Horsley III (California)

Ryu, Donna Miae (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Eisenberg, Sara J. (California)

Flynn, Ronald P. (California)

Gupta, Neha (California)

Herrera, Dennis J. (California)

Lee, Mollie M. (California)

McGrath, Aileen M. (California)

Mere, Yvonne Rosil (California)

Smith, Jesse C. (California)

Judge(s)

Orrick, William Horsley III (California)

Ryu, Donna Miae (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Eisenberg, Sara J. (California)

Flynn, Ronald P. (California)

Gupta, Neha (California)

Herrera, Dennis J. (California)

Lee, Mollie M. (California)

McGrath, Aileen M. (California)

Mere, Yvonne Rosil (California)

Smith, Jesse C. (California)

Steeley, Tara M. (California)

Taylor, Jennifer Lee (California)

Van Aken, Christine (California)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Anderson, David Lloyd (California)

Buckingham, Stephen J. (District of Columbia)

Hinshelwood, Brad (District of Columbia)

Hunt, Joseph H. (District of Columbia)

Mauler, Daniel (District of Columbia)

Readler, Chad Andrew (District of Columbia)

Simpson, W. Scott (District of Columbia)

Stern, Marc (District of Columbia)

Stretch, Brian (District of Columbia)

Tenny, Daniel (District of Columbia)

Tyler, John Russell (District of Columbia)

Other Attorney(s)

Aguilar, Edmundo (California)

Alger, Maureen P. (California)

Artiga-Purcell, Jose Camilo (California)

Axelrod, Julie B. (District of Columbia)

Badlani, Chirag (Illinois)

Baker, Andrew H. (California)

Benedict, Adriana Lee (California)

Bergeron, Claire M. (District of Columbia)

Berner, Nicole (District of Columbia)

Burrichter, Christopher S. (California)

Cabraser, Elizabeth J. (California)

Carroll, Catherine M.A. (District of Columbia)

Carter, Margaret L. (California)

Chatterjee, Indra Neel (California)

Cotchett, Joseph W. (California)

Dermody, Kelly M. (California)

Dietz, Rebecca H (Louisiana)

Ehrlich, Lisa Catherine (California)

Escamilla, David A. (Texas)

Fineman, Nancy L. (California)

Foxx, Kimberly M. (Illinois)

Fritz, Kathryn J. (California)

Gertner, Leo (District of Columbia)

Gewertz, Nevin M (Illinois)

Ghassemi-Vanni, Sheeva June (California)

Goldberg, Nicholas Samuel (California)

Goldstein, Dax Luce (California)

Goodmiller, Bruce Reed (California)

Gorelick, Jamie S. (District of Columbia)

Hansen, Greta Suzanne (California)

Harris, Cody Shawn (California)

Harvey, Dean M. (California)

Hernandez, Philip M. (California)

Holloway, Amy Bisson (California)

Holtzman, Jonathan V. (California)

Hyde, Hayes P. (California)

Johnson, Thomas Michael Jr. (West Virginia)

Jones, Lauren A. (New York)

Kazantzis, Kyra A. (California)

Keker, John Watkins (California)

Lamy, Michelle A. (California)

Lederer, Caryn C (Illinois)

Li, Jun (California)

Lin, James (California)

Lubin, Katherine Collinge (California)

Magaziner, Fred T. (California)

Malkani, Latika (California)

McClellan, Nathan M. (California)

McKee, Charles J (California)

McRae, Dana (California)

Menz, Sheila E. (District of Columbia)

Morrisey, Patrick (West Virginia)

Narayan, Kavita Kandala (California)

O'Leary, Ann Margaret (California)

Perrin, Robert Ward (California)

Peterson, Erica N. (West Virginia)

Piers, Matthew J. (Illinois)

Premo, Patrick E. (California)

Prestel, Claire (District of Columbia)

Prouty, Thomas Howard (California)

Purcell, Daniel Edward (California)

Reider, Nicholas A. (California)

Renne, Louise H. (California)

Rhea, Meghan (California)

Ross, Linda Margaret (California)

Salahi, Yaman (California)

Schuman, Brett M. (California)

Serrano, Lawrence Javier (California)

Sherman, Monique R (California)

Shih, Daniel Jeffrey (Washington)

Siegel, Jonathan H. (California)

Sokol, William A. (California)

Sommovilla, Rachel Hanna (California)

Spiegel, Julia Blau (California)

Summer, Alexandra P. (California)

Teshima, Darren S. (California)

Van Nest, Robert A. (California)

Washington, Brian E. (California)

Whelan, Amy E. (California)

Williams, James Robyzad (California)

Winner, Sonya (California)

Wright, H. Kevin (Washington)

Zane, Shirlee (California)

Ziegler, Donna Raylene (California)

Zimmerman, Mitchell (California)

Expert/Monitor/Master

Chapman, James (Illinois)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

3:17-cv-00485

Docket [PACER]

Oct. 8, 2019

Oct. 8, 2019

Docket
1

3:17-cv-00485

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief

Jan. 31, 2017

Jan. 31, 2017

Complaint
11

3:17-cv-00485

Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should Be Related Pursuant to N.D. Cal. Civil L.R. 3-12(B)

Feb. 7, 2017

Feb. 7, 2017

Pleading / Motion / Brief
12

3:17-cv-00485

Statement of Support Regarding Santa Clara's Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should Be Related

Feb. 7, 2017

Feb. 7, 2017

Pleading / Motion / Brief
18

3:17-cv-00485

Defendants' Statement of Support Regarding Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should Be Related

Feb. 10, 2017

Feb. 10, 2017

Pleading / Motion / Brief
20

3:17-cv-00485

First Amended Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief

Feb. 27, 2017

Feb. 27, 2017

Complaint
27

3:17-cv-00485

Declaration of Colleen Chawla in Support of City and County of San Francisco's Motion for Preliminary Injunction

March 8, 2017

March 8, 2017

Pleading / Motion / Brief
29

3:17-cv-00485

Request for Judicial Notice in Support of City and County of San Francisco's Motion for Preliminary Injunction

March 8, 2017

March 8, 2017

Pleading / Motion / Brief
23

3:17-cv-00485

Declaration of Melissa Whitehouse in Support of City and County of San Francisco's Motion for Preliminary Injunction

March 8, 2017

March 8, 2017

Other
22

3:17-cv-00485

Declaration of Ben Rosenfield in Support of City and County of San Francisco's Motion for Preliminary Injunction

March 8, 2017

March 8, 2017

Other

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4578395/city-and-county-of-san-francisco-v-donald-j-trump/

Last updated Nov. 29, 2022, 3:23 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0971-11115761.). Filed byCity and County of San Francisco. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Lee, Mollie) (Filed on 1/31/2017) (Entered: 01/31/2017)

1 Civil Cover Sheet

View on RECAP

Jan. 31, 2017

Jan. 31, 2017

RECAP
2

Proposed Summons. (Lee, Mollie) (Filed on 1/31/2017) (Entered: 01/31/2017)

Jan. 31, 2017

Jan. 31, 2017

PACER
3

Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu. Counsel for plaintiff or the removing party is responsible for serving the Complaint or Notice of Removal, Summons and the assigned judge's standing orders and all other new case documents upon the opposing parties. For information, visit E-Filing A New Civil Case at http://cand.uscourts.gov/ecf/caseopening.Standing orders can be downloaded from the court's web page at www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges. Upon receipt, the summons will be issued and returned electronically. Counsel is required to send chambers a copy of the initiating documents pursuant to L.R. 5-1(e)(7). A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. Consent/Declination due by 2/14/2017. (sv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/31/2017) (Entered: 01/31/2017)

Jan. 31, 2017

Jan. 31, 2017

PACER
4

Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: Case Management Statement due by 4/26/2017. Case Management Conference set for 5/3/2017 01:30 PM. (vlkS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/31/2017) (Entered: 01/31/2017)

Jan. 31, 2017

Jan. 31, 2017

RECAP
5

Summons Issued as to Dana J Boente, President Donald J. Trump, John F Kelly, United States of America, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (vlkS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/31/2017) (Entered: 01/31/2017)

Jan. 31, 2017

Jan. 31, 2017

PACER
6

CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by City and County of San Francisco.. (Lee, Mollie) (Filed on 2/2/2017) (Entered: 02/02/2017)

Feb. 2, 2017

Feb. 2, 2017

PACER
7

CLERK'S NOTICE OF IMPENDING REASSIGNMENT TO A U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: The Clerk of this Court will now randomly reassign this case to a District Judge because either (1) a party has not consented to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge, or (2) time is of the essence in deciding a pending judicial action for which the necessary consents to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction have not been secured. You will be informed by separate notice of the district judge to whom this case is reassigned. ALL HEARING DATES PRESENTLY SCHEDULED BEFORE THE CURRENT MAGISTRATE JUDGE ARE VACATED AND SHOULD BE RE-NOTICED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE JUDGE TO WHOM THIS CASE IS REASSIGNED. This is a text only docket entry; there is no document associated with this notice. (vlk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/3/2017) (Entered: 02/03/2017)

Feb. 3, 2017

Feb. 3, 2017

PACER
8

NOTICE of Appearance by Ronald P. Flynn (Flynn, Ronald) (Filed on 2/6/2017) (Entered: 02/06/2017)

Feb. 6, 2017

Feb. 6, 2017

PACER
9

ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Hon. William H. Orrick for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu no longer assigned to the case. This case is assigned to a judge who participates in the Cameras in the Courtroom Pilot Project. See General Order 65 and http://cand.uscourts.gov/cameras. Signed by the Executive Committee on February 6, 2017. (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording)(cjlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/6/2017) (Entered: 02/06/2017)

1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording

View on PACER

Feb. 6, 2017

Feb. 6, 2017

PACER
10

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ORDER: Case Management Conference set for 5/2/2017 02:00 PM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Case Management Statement due by 4/25/2017. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 2/7/2017. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/7/2017) (Entered: 02/07/2017)

Feb. 7, 2017

Feb. 7, 2017

PACER
11

MOTION to Relate Case PURSUANT TO N.D. CAL. CIVIL L.R. 3-12(B) filed by County of Santa Clara. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Cody S. Harris In Support Of Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should Be Related, # 2 Exhibit A to Declaration of Cody S. Harris, # 3 Exhibit B to Declaration of Cody S. Harris, # 4 Proposed Order, # 5 Certificate/Proof of Service)(Harris, Cody) (Filed on 2/7/2017) (Entered: 02/07/2017)

1 Declaration of Cody S. Harris In Support Of Administrative Motion to Consider Wh

View on PACER

2 Exhibit A to Declaration of Cody S. Harris

View on PACER

3 Exhibit B to Declaration of Cody S. Harris

View on PACER

4 Proposed Order

View on PACER

5 Certificate/Proof of Service

View on PACER

Feb. 7, 2017

Feb. 7, 2017

PACER
12

Statement of Non-Opposition STATEMENT OF SUPPORT REGARDING SANTA CLARA'S ADMINISTRATIVE 11 MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED filed byCity and County of San Francisco. (Lee, Mollie) (Filed on 2/7/2017) Modified on 2/8/2017 (aaaS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/07/2017)

Feb. 7, 2017

Feb. 7, 2017

PACER
13

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by City and County of San Francisco re 12 Statement of Non-Opposition (Lee, Mollie) (Filed on 2/7/2017) (Entered: 02/07/2017)

Feb. 7, 2017

Feb. 7, 2017

PACER
14

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by City and County of San Francisco (Lee, Mollie) (Filed on 2/8/2017) (Entered: 02/08/2017)

Feb. 8, 2017

Feb. 8, 2017

PACER
15

NOTICE of Appearance by Yvonne Rosil Mere (Mere, Yvonne) (Filed on 2/8/2017) (Entered: 02/08/2017)

Feb. 8, 2017

Feb. 8, 2017

PACER
16

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by City and County of San Francisco (Lee, Mollie) (Filed on 2/8/2017) (Entered: 02/08/2017)

Feb. 8, 2017

Feb. 8, 2017

PACER
17

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by City and County of San Francisco Supplemental Proof of Service (Lee, Mollie) (Filed on 2/9/2017) (Entered: 02/09/2017)

Feb. 9, 2017

Feb. 9, 2017

PACER
18

Statement of Non-Opposition re 11 MOTION to Relate Case PURSUANT TO N.D. CAL. CIVIL L.R. 3-12(B) Statement of Support filed byDana J. Boente, President Donald J. Trump, John F Kelly, United States of America. (Related document(s) 11 ) (Simpson, W.) (Filed on 2/10/2017) (Entered: 02/10/2017)

Feb. 10, 2017

Feb. 10, 2017

RECAP
19

Order by Hon. William H. Orrick granting 11 Motion to Relate Case No. 3:17cv574-LHK. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/10/2017) (Entered: 02/10/2017)

Feb. 10, 2017

Feb. 10, 2017

RECAP
20

AMENDED COMPLAINT First Amended Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief against All Defendants. Filed byCity and County of San Francisco. (Lee, Mollie) (Filed on 2/27/2017) (Entered: 02/27/2017)

Feb. 27, 2017

Feb. 27, 2017

RECAP
21

MOTION for Preliminary Injunction City and County of San Francisco's Notice of Motion and Motion for Preliminary Injunction; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof filed by City and County of San Francisco. Motion Hearing set for 4/12/2017 02:00 PM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. William H. Orrick. Responses due by 3/22/2017. Replies due by 3/29/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Eisenberg, Sara) (Filed on 3/8/2017) (Entered: 03/08/2017)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

March 8, 2017

March 8, 2017

RECAP
22

Declaration of Ben Rosenfield in Support of 21 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction City and County of San Francisco's Notice of Motion and Motion for Preliminary Injunction; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof Declaration of Ben Rosenfield in Support of City and County of San Francisco's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byCity and County of San Francisco. (Related document(s) 21 ) (Eisenberg, Sara) (Filed on 3/8/2017) (Entered: 03/08/2017)

March 8, 2017

March 8, 2017

RECAP
23

Declaration of Melissa Whitehouse in Support of 21 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction City and County of San Francisco's Notice of Motion and Motion for Preliminary Injunction; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof Declaration of Melissa Whitehouse in Support of City and County of San Francisco's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byCity and County of San Francisco. (Related document(s) 21 ) (Eisenberg, Sara) (Filed on 3/8/2017) (Entered: 03/08/2017)

March 8, 2017

March 8, 2017

RECAP
24

Declaration of Vicki Hennessy in Support of 21 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction City and County of San Francisco's Notice of Motion and Motion for Preliminary Injunction; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof Declaration of Vicki Hennessy in Support of City and County of San Francisco's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byCity and County of San Francisco. (Related document(s) 21 ) (Eisenberg, Sara) (Filed on 3/8/2017) (Entered: 03/08/2017)

March 8, 2017

March 8, 2017

PACER
25

Declaration of Peter Walsh in Support of 21 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction City and County of San Francisco's Notice of Motion and Motion for Preliminary Injunction; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof Declaration of Commander Peter Walsh in Support of City and County of San Francisco's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byCity and County of San Francisco. (Related document(s) 21 ) (Eisenberg, Sara) (Filed on 3/8/2017) (Entered: 03/08/2017)

March 8, 2017

March 8, 2017

PACER
26

Declaration of Tomas Aragon in Support of 21 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction City and County of San Francisco's Notice of Motion and Motion for Preliminary Injunction; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof Declaration of Tomas Aragon in Support of City and County of San Francisco's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byCity and County of San Francisco. (Related document(s) 21 ) (Eisenberg, Sara) (Filed on 3/8/2017) (Entered: 03/08/2017)

March 8, 2017

March 8, 2017

PACER
27

Declaration of Colleen Chawla in Support of 21 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction City and County of San Francisco's Notice of Motion and Motion for Preliminary Injunction; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof Declaration of Colleen Chawla in Support of City and County of San Francisco's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byCity and County of San Francisco. (Related document(s) 21 ) (Eisenberg, Sara) (Filed on 3/8/2017) (Entered: 03/08/2017)

March 8, 2017

March 8, 2017

PACER
28

Declaration of Sara Eisenberg in Support of 21 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction City and County of San Francisco's Notice of Motion and Motion for Preliminary Injunction; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof Declaration of Sara Eisenberg in Support of City and County of San Francisco's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byCity and County of San Francisco. (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)(Related document(s) 21 ) (Eisenberg, Sara) (Filed on 3/8/2017) (Entered: 03/08/2017)

1 Exhibit A

View on PACER

2 Exhibit B

View on PACER

3 Exhibit C

View on PACER

4 Exhibit D

View on PACER

5 Exhibit E

View on PACER

6 Exhibit F

View on PACER

7 Exhibit G

View on PACER

8 Exhibit H

View on PACER

9 Exhibit I

View on PACER

10 Exhibit J

View on PACER

March 8, 2017

March 8, 2017

PACER
29

Request for Judicial Notice re 21 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction City and County of San Francisco's Notice of Motion and Motion for Preliminary Injunction; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof Request for Judicial Notice in Support of City and County of San Francisco's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byCity and County of San Francisco. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E)(Related document(s) 21 ) (Eisenberg, Sara) (Filed on 3/8/2017) (Entered: 03/08/2017)

1 Exhibit A

View on PACER

2 Exhibit B

View on PACER

3 Exhibit C

View on PACER

4 Exhibit D

View on PACER

5 Exhibit E

View on PACER

March 8, 2017

March 8, 2017

PACER
30

Letter from Mollie M. Lee . (Lee, Mollie) (Filed on 3/20/2017) (Entered: 03/20/2017)

March 20, 2017

March 20, 2017

PACER
31

ORDER REGARDING AMICUS BRIEFING. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 03/21/2017. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/21/2017) (Entered: 03/21/2017)

March 21, 2017

March 21, 2017

RECAP
32

NOTICE of Appearance by Claire P. Prestel (Prestel, Claire) (Filed on 3/22/2017) (Entered: 03/22/2017)

March 22, 2017

March 22, 2017

PACER
33

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION Leave to File Amicus Brief filed by Service Employees International Union, Unite Here Local 19, Working Partnerships USA. Responses due by 3/28/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Brief Amici Curiae, # 2 Proposed Order)(Prestel, Claire) (Filed on 3/22/2017) (Entered: 03/22/2017)

1 Proposed Brief Amici Curiae

View on PACER

2 Proposed Order

View on PACER

March 22, 2017

March 22, 2017

PACER
34

STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER filed by John F Kelly, Jefferson B. Sessions, Donald J. Trump, United States of America. (Simpson, W.) (Filed on 3/22/2017) (Entered: 03/22/2017)

March 22, 2017

March 22, 2017

RECAP
35

OPPOSITION/RESPONSE (re 21 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction City and County of San Francisco's Notice of Motion and Motion for Preliminary Injunction; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof ) filed byJohn F Kelly, Jefferson B. Sessions, Donald J. Trump, United States of America. (Attachments: # 1 Ltr. from Samuel R. Ramer, Acting Asst Atty Gen., Office of Legis. Affairs)(Simpson, W.) (Filed on 3/22/2017) (Entered: 03/22/2017)

1 Ltr. from Samuel R. Ramer, Acting Asst Atty Gen., Office of Legis. Affairs

View on RECAP

March 22, 2017

March 22, 2017

RECAP
36

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN AMICUS BRIEF filed by Professors of Constitutional Law, Administrative Law, and Immigration Law. Responses due by 3/28/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Proposed Order)(Winner, Sonya) (Filed on 3/22/2017) (Entered: 03/22/2017)

1 Exhibit 1

View on PACER

2 Proposed Order

View on PACER

March 22, 2017

March 22, 2017

PACER
37

NOTICE of Appearance by Nathan M McClellan (McClellan, Nathan) (Filed on 3/22/2017) (Entered: 03/22/2017)

March 22, 2017

March 22, 2017

PACER
38

MOTION for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief filed by Southern Poverty Law Center, Adelante Alabama Worker Center, Alabama Coalition for Immigrant Justice, American Federation of Teachers, Americans for Immigrant Justice, Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Asian Law Caucus, Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Los Angeles, Asian Americans Advancing Justice - AAJC, Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Atlanta, Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, Equal Rights Advocates, Florida Immigrant Coaltion, Inc, Florida Legal Services, Inc, Greater Birmingham Ministries, Greater Rochester Coalition for Immigration Justice, Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, Immigrant Legal Resource Center, Jobs With Justice, Justice in Motion, Latin American Legal Defense and Education Fund, LatinoJustice PRLDEF, National Employment Law Project, National Immigration Law Center, New Orleans Workers' Center for Racial Justice, Northwest Forest Worker Center, Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services, Safe Horizon, Southeast Immigrant Rights Network, St. Louis Workers Education Society, We Belong Together, Worker Justice Center of New York, Inc, Workers Defense Project, Worksafe. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 - Additional Amici, # 2 Exhibit 2 - Amicus Curiae Brief)(McClellan, Nathan) (Filed on 3/22/2017) (Entered: 03/22/2017)

1 Exhibit 1 - Additional Amici

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit 2 - Amicus Curiae Brief

View on RECAP

March 22, 2017

March 22, 2017

RECAP
39

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION Motion for Administrative Relief to File Brief of Amici Curiae filed by Ampush Media, Inc., Appboy Inc., Azavea, Checkr, Inc., Chegg Inc., Eventbrite, General Assembly, IDEO, Knotel, Managed by Q Inc., Mapbox, Marin Software, Minted LLC, SugarCRM Inc., Work & Co. Responses due by 3/27/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B)(Fritz, Kathryn) (Filed on 3/22/2017) (Entered: 03/22/2017)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

2 Exhibit A

View on PACER

3 Exhibit B

View on PACER

March 22, 2017

March 22, 2017

PACER
40

MOTION to File Amicus Curiae Brief in Support of Motion(s) for Preliminary Injunction filed by County of Alameda, City of Berkeley, City of Davis, City of East Palo Alto, City of Fremont, County of Marin, County Of Monterey, City of Mountain View, City Of Oakland, City of Richmond, City of Salinas, City Of San Jose, City of Santa Cruz, City of Santa Rosa. Responses due by 4/5/2017. Replies due by 4/12/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A (Brief of Amici Curiae California Cities and Counties), # 2 Proposed Order Granting Motion for Leave to File as Amici Curiae)(Ross, Linda) (Filed on 3/22/2017) (Entered: 03/22/2017)

1 Exhibit A (Brief of Amici Curiae California Cities and Counties)

View on PACER

2 Proposed Order Granting Motion for Leave to File as Amici Curiae

View on PACER

March 22, 2017

March 22, 2017

PACER
41

MOTION to File Amicus Curiae Brief filed by Tahirih Justice Center, et al.. Responses due by 4/5/2017. Replies due by 4/12/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Brief, Amici Curiae, # 2 Proposed Order)(Gorelick, Jamie) (Filed on 3/22/2017) (Entered: 03/22/2017)

1 Proposed Brief, Amici Curiae

View on PACER

2 Proposed Order

View on PACER

March 22, 2017

March 22, 2017

RECAP
42

NOTICE of Appearance by Christine Van Aken Notice of Appearance of Christine Van Aken (Van Aken, Christine) (Filed on 3/23/2017) (Entered: 03/23/2017)

March 23, 2017

March 23, 2017

PACER
43

MOTION to Relate Case filed by city of richmond. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Nancy L. Fineman, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 2, # 4 Exhibit 3 (part 1 of 4), # 5 Exhibit 3 (part 2 of 4), # 6 Exhibit 3 (Part 3 of 4), # 7 Exhibit 3 (part 4 of 4), # 8 Proposed Order)(Fineman, Nancy) (Filed on 3/23/2017) (Entered: 03/23/2017)

1 Declaration of Nancy L. Fineman

View on PACER

2 Exhibit 1

View on PACER

3 Exhibit 2

View on PACER

4 Exhibit 3 (part 1 of 4)

View on PACER

5 Exhibit 3 (part 2 of 4)

View on PACER

6 Exhibit 3 (Part 3 of 4)

View on PACER

7 Exhibit 3 (part 4 of 4)

View on PACER

8 Proposed Order

View on PACER

March 23, 2017

March 23, 2017

RECAP
44

NOTICE of Appearance by Tara M. Steeley Notice of Appearance of Tara Steeley (Steeley, Tara) (Filed on 3/23/2017) (Entered: 03/23/2017)

March 23, 2017

March 23, 2017

PACER
45

NOTICE of Appearance by Neha Gupta Notice of Appearance of Neha Gupta (Gupta, Neha) (Filed on 3/23/2017) (Entered: 03/23/2017)

March 23, 2017

March 23, 2017

PACER
46

NOTICE of Appearance by Matthew Stephen Lee Notice of Appearance of Matthew S. Lee (Lee, Matthew) (Filed on 3/23/2017) (Entered: 03/23/2017)

March 23, 2017

March 23, 2017

PACER
47

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION for Leave to File Brief as Amicus Curiae in Support of Plaintiff City and County of San Francisco's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by International Municipal Lawyers Association. Responses due by 3/27/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Brief of Amicus Curiae, # 2 Proposed Order)(Schuman, Brett) (Filed on 3/23/2017) (Entered: 03/23/2017)

1 Proposed Brief of Amicus Curiae

View on PACER

2 Proposed Order

View on PACER

March 23, 2017

March 23, 2017

PACER
48

NOTICE of Appearance by Brett Michael Schuman (Schuman, Brett) (Filed on 3/23/2017) (Entered: 03/23/2017)

March 23, 2017

March 23, 2017

PACER
49

NOTICE of Appearance by Indra Neel Chatterjee (Chatterjee, Indra) (Filed on 3/23/2017) (Entered: 03/23/2017)

March 23, 2017

March 23, 2017

PACER
50

NOTICE of Appearance by Nicholas A Reider (Reider, Nicholas) (Filed on 3/23/2017) (Entered: 03/23/2017)

March 23, 2017

March 23, 2017

PACER
51

NOTICE of Appearance by Hayes Phillips Hyde (Hyde, Hayes) (Filed on 3/23/2017) (Entered: 03/23/2017)

March 23, 2017

March 23, 2017

PACER
52

Statement of Non-Opposition re 43 MOTION to Relate Case Statement of Support Regarding City of Richmond's Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should Be Related filed byCity and County of San Francisco. (Related document(s) 43 ) (Lee, Mollie) (Filed on 3/24/2017) (Entered: 03/24/2017)

March 24, 2017

March 24, 2017

PACER
53

Order by Hon. William H. Orrick granting 43 Motion to Relate Case No. 3:17cv1535. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/24/2017) (Entered: 03/24/2017)

March 24, 2017

March 24, 2017

PACER
54

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by City and County of San Francisco re 52 Statement of Non-Opposition, Proof of Service (Lee, Mollie) (Filed on 3/24/2017) (Entered: 03/24/2017)

March 24, 2017

March 24, 2017

PACER
55

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by city of richmond by Personal Service of Summons, Complaint and Related Documents on the United States of America (Fineman, Nancy) (Filed on 3/28/2017) (Entered: 03/28/2017)

March 28, 2017

March 28, 2017

PACER
56

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by city of richmond by Certified Mail of Summons, Complaint and Related Documents on President Donald Trump, Attorney General Jefferson B. Sessions, Secretary of State of Homeland Security John F. Kelly and United States of America (Fineman, Nancy) (Filed on 3/28/2017) (Entered: 03/28/2017)

March 28, 2017

March 28, 2017

PACER
57

ORDER RESETTING HEARING DATE as to 21 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction. Motion Hearing reset for 4/14/2017 02:00 PM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. William H. Orrick. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 03/28/2017. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/28/2017) (Additional attachment(s) added on 3/28/2017: # 1 Corrected image) (jmdS, COURT STAFF). Modified on 3/28/2017 to add corrected (properly executed) order image. (jmdS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 03/28/2017)

1 Corrected image

View on PACER

March 28, 2017

March 28, 2017

PACER
58

MOTION for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief filed by Public Schools, Public School Districts, and Associations of Educators. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A: [Proposed] Brief of Amici Curiae, # 2 Declaration of Ralph G. Porras, # 3 Declaration of Erika Torres, # 4 Declaration of Ricardo Mireles, # 5 Declaration of Sonia Picos, # 6 [Proposed] Order Granting Motion Leave)(Teshima, Darren) (Filed on 3/29/2017) (Entered: 03/29/2017)

1 Exhibit A: [Proposed] Brief of Amici Curiae

View on PACER

2 Declaration of Ralph G. Porras

View on PACER

3 Declaration of Erika Torres

View on PACER

4 Declaration of Ricardo Mireles

View on PACER

5 Declaration of Sonia Picos

View on PACER

6 [Proposed] Order Granting Motion Leave

View on PACER

March 29, 2017

March 29, 2017

RECAP
59

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION Leave to File Amici Curiae Brief filed by Individual Sheriffs and Police Chiefs. Responses due by 4/3/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Proposed Amici Curiae Brief, # 2 Proposed Order)(Piers, Matthew) (Filed on 3/29/2017) (Entered: 03/29/2017)

1 Exhibit Proposed Amici Curiae Brief

View on RECAP

2 Proposed Order

View on PACER

March 29, 2017

March 29, 2017

RECAP
60

REPLY (re 21 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction City and County of San Francisco's Notice of Motion and Motion for Preliminary Injunction; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof ) City and County of San Francisco's Reply to Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byCity and County of San Francisco. (Eisenberg, Sara) (Filed on 3/29/2017) (Entered: 03/29/2017)

March 29, 2017

March 29, 2017

PACER
61

Request for Judicial Notice re 21 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction City and County of San Francisco's Notice of Motion and Motion for Preliminary Injunction; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof Supplemental Request for Judicial Notice in Support of City and County of San Francisco's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byCity and County of San Francisco. (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)(Related document(s) 21 ) (Eisenberg, Sara) (Filed on 3/29/2017) (Entered: 03/29/2017)

1 Exhibit A

View on PACER

2 Exhibit B

View on PACER

3 Exhibit C

View on PACER

4 Exhibit D

View on PACER

5 Exhibit E

View on PACER

6 Exhibit F

View on PACER

7 Exhibit G

View on PACER

8 Exhibit H

View on PACER

March 29, 2017

March 29, 2017

PACER
62

MOTION for Leave to File Amicus Brief of 36 Cities and Counties in Support of City and County of San Francisco's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by City of Menlo Park, City of New Orleans. (Attachments: # 1 Amicus Brief, # 2 Proposed Order)(Dermody, Kelly) (Filed on 3/29/2017) (Entered: 03/29/2017)

1 Amicus Brief

View on PACER

2 Proposed Order

View on PACER

March 29, 2017

March 29, 2017

PACER
63

MOTION for Leave to File An Amicus Curiae Brief In Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Constitutional Law Scholars. (Attachments: # 1 Amicus Brief, # 2 Proposed Order)(Gewertz, Nevin) (Filed on 3/29/2017) (Entered: 03/29/2017)

1 Amicus Brief

View on PACER

2 Proposed Order

View on PACER

March 29, 2017

March 29, 2017

PACER
64

MOTION to File Amicus Curiae Brief in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Tom Torlakson. Motion Hearing set for 4/14/2017 02:00 PM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. William H. Orrick. Responses due by 4/5/2017. Replies due by 4/12/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Amicus Brief, # 2 Proposed Order)(Prouty, Thomas) (Filed on 3/29/2017) (Entered: 03/29/2017)

1 Amicus Brief

View on PACER

2 Proposed Order

View on PACER

March 29, 2017

March 29, 2017

PACER
65

Amicus Curiae APPEARANCE entered by Lisa Catherine Ehrlich on behalf of State of California. (Ehrlich, Lisa) (Filed on 3/29/2017) (Entered: 03/29/2017)

March 29, 2017

March 29, 2017

PACER
66

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION LEAVE TO FILE AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF filed by State of California. Responses due by 4/3/2017. (Attachments: # 1 AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION, # 2 Proposed Order GRANTING STATE OF CALIFORNIA'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN AMICUS BRIEF)(Ehrlich, Lisa) (Filed on 3/29/2017) (Entered: 03/29/2017)

1 AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUN

View on PACER

2 Proposed Order GRANTING STATE OF CALIFORNIA'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR LEA

View on PACER

March 29, 2017

March 29, 2017

PACER
67

MOTION to File Amicus Curiae Brief Motion for Leave to File Brief of Amicus Curiae Anti-Defamation League in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Anti-Defamation League. Responses due by 4/12/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Brief of Amicus Curiae, # 2 Proposed Order)(Perrin, Robert) (Filed on 3/29/2017) (Entered: 03/29/2017)

1 Brief of Amicus Curiae

View on PACER

2 Proposed Order

View on PACER

March 29, 2017

March 29, 2017

PACER
68

MOTION to File Amicus Curiae Brief in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by API Council of San Francisco, California Association of Nonprofits, Coalition of Agencies Serving the Elderly, Council of Community Housing Organizations, HIV/AIDS Provider Network, Homeless Emergency Service Providers Association, Long Term Care Coordinating Council, San Francisco Human Services Network, San Francisco Interfaith Council, San Francisco Latino Parity and Equity Coalition, San Francisco Mental Health Contractors Association, Silicon Valley Council of Nonprofits, Supportive Housing Providers Network. Motion Hearing set for 4/14/2017 02:00 PM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. William H. Orrick. Responses due by 4/12/2017. Replies due by 4/19/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Brief of Nonprofit Associations as Amici Curiae in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction, # 2 Appendix Appendix A to Motion for Leave to File Brief as Amici Curiae and Brief of Amici Curiae, # 3 Proposed Order [Proposed] Order Granting Nonprofit Associations' Motion for Leave to File Brief as Amici Curiae)(Alger, Maureen) (Filed on 3/29/2017) (Entered: 03/29/2017)

1 Brief of Nonprofit Associations as Amici Curiae in Support of Plaintiff's

View on PACER

2 Appendix Appendix A to Motion for Leave to File Brief as Amici Curiae and Brief

View on PACER

3 Proposed Order [Proposed] Order Granting Nonprofit Associations' Motion for

View on PACER

March 29, 2017

March 29, 2017

PACER
69

Letter from Fenwick & West LLP re Joinder of San Jose/Silicon Valley NAACP in Motion for Leave to File an Amicus Brief and the Proposed Brief of Amici Curiae Southern Poverty Law Center. (Ghassemi-Vanni, Sheeva) (Filed on 4/5/2017) (Entered: 04/05/2017)

April 5, 2017

April 5, 2017

PACER
70

CLERK'S NOTICE of time change for hearing as to 21 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction. Motion Hearing reset for 4/14/2017 09:00 AM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. William H. Orrick. Hearings inadvertently set for motions to file amicus briefs are VACATED. No oral argument is needed as to these motions. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/6/2017) (Entered: 04/06/2017)

April 6, 2017

April 6, 2017

PACER
71

NOTICE of Appearance by Annasara Guzzo Purcell Amici Curiae Technology Companies (Purcell, Annasara) (Filed on 4/6/2017) (Entered: 04/06/2017)

April 6, 2017

April 6, 2017

PACER
72

Order by Hon. William H. Orrick granting 34 Stipulation. Defendant's response to the plaintiff's complaint shall be filed no later than April 28, 2017. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/7/2017) (Entered: 04/07/2017)

April 7, 2017

April 7, 2017

PACER
73

NOTICE of Appearance by W. Scott Simpson Additional Counsel for Defendants (Simpson, W.) (Filed on 4/11/2017) (Entered: 04/11/2017)

April 11, 2017

April 11, 2017

PACER
74

Request for Judicial Notice Second Supplemental Request for Judicial Notice in Support of City and County of San Francisco's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byCity and County of San Francisco. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D)(Lee, Mollie) (Filed on 4/13/2017) (Entered: 04/13/2017)

1 Exhibit A

View on PACER

2 Exhibit B

View on PACER

3 Exhibit C

View on PACER

4 Exhibit D

View on PACER

April 13, 2017

April 13, 2017

PACER
75

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Hon. William H. Orrick: Motion Hearing held on 4/14/2017 re Motions for Preliminary Injunction. Hearing conducted to the constitutionality of the Executive Order regarding sanctuary jurisdictions. A case management conference is set for April 25, 2017 at 1:30 p.m. in Case No. 3:17cv485 to discuss litigation of the Section 1373 issues, which would benefit from a more comprehensive record. Argument of counsel heard. Motions taken under submission; written order to follow. Total Time in Court 1 hour, 9 minutes. Court Reporter Name Katherine Sullivan. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 4/14/2017) (Entered: 04/14/2017)

April 14, 2017

April 14, 2017

PACER
76

TRANSCRIPT ORDER for proceedings held on April 14, 2017 before Hon. William H. Orrick by City of Richmond, for Court Reporter Katherine Sullivan. (Fineman, Nancy) (Filed on 4/14/2017) (Entered: 04/14/2017)

April 14, 2017

April 14, 2017

PACER
77

TRANSCRIPT ORDER for proceedings held on 4/14/2017 before Hon. William H. Orrick by City and County of San Francisco, for Court Reporter Katherine Sullivan. (Lee, Mollie) (Filed on 4/14/2017) (Entered: 04/14/2017)

April 14, 2017

April 14, 2017

PACER
78

TRANSCRIPT ORDER for proceedings held on 4/14/2017 before Hon. William H. Orrick by John F Kelly, Jefferson B. Sessions, Donald J. Trump, United States of America, for Court Reporter Katherine Sullivan. (Simpson, W.) (Filed on 4/14/2017) (Entered: 04/14/2017)

April 14, 2017

April 14, 2017

PACER

Set Hearing: Case Management Conference set for 4/25/2017 01:30 PM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/14/2017) Modified on 4/14/2017 to correct date (jmdS, COURT STAFF).

April 14, 2017

April 14, 2017

PACER

Set/Reset Hearings

April 14, 2017

April 14, 2017

PACER
79

Transcript of Proceedings held on 4/14/17, before Judge William H. Orrick. Court Reporter/Transcriber Katherine Powell Sullivan, telephone number 415-794-6659. Per General Order No. 59 and Judicial Conference policy, this transcript may be viewed only at the Clerk's Office public terminal or may be purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber until the deadline for the Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Any Notice of Intent to Request Redaction, if required, is due no later than 5 business days from date of this filing. (Re (76 in 3:17-cv-00485-WHO) Transcript Order, (94 in 3:17-cv-00574-WHO) Transcript Order, (78 in 3:17-cv-00485-WHO) Transcript Order, (77 in 3:17-cv-00485-WHO) Transcript Order ) Redaction Request due 5/8/2017. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 5/18/2017. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 7/17/2017. (Sullivan, Katherine) (Filed on 4/17/2017) (Entered: 04/17/2017)

April 17, 2017

April 17, 2017

PACER
80

CLERK'S NOTICE - Case Management Conference set for today (4/25/2017) at 1:30 p.m. is VACATED. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/25/2017) (Entered: 04/25/2017)

April 25, 2017

April 25, 2017

PACER
81

CLERK'S NOTICE - The start time of the Case Management Conference set for 5/2/2017 is advanced to 01:30 PM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/25/2017) (Entered: 04/25/2017)

April 25, 2017

April 25, 2017

PACER
82

ORDER GRANTING THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA'S AND CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO'S MOTIONS TO ENJOIN SECTION 9(a) OF EXECUTIVE ORDER 13768 by Judge William H. Orrick re: (21) Motion for Preliminary Injunction in case 3:17-cv-00485-WHO and (26) Motion for Preliminary Injunction in case 3:17-cv-00574-WHO. All pending administrative motions for leave to file Amicus Briefs are also GRANTED. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/25/2017) (Entered: 04/25/2017)

April 25, 2017

April 25, 2017

RECAP
83

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT Joint Case Management Statement filed by City and County of San Francisco. (Lee, Mollie) (Filed on 4/25/2017) (Entered: 04/25/2017)

April 25, 2017

April 25, 2017

RECAP
84

STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER re 72 Order on Stipulation filed by John F Kelly, Jefferson B. Sessions, Donald J. Trump, United States of America. (Simpson, W.) (Filed on 4/28/2017) (Entered: 04/28/2017)

April 28, 2017

April 28, 2017

RECAP
85

EX PARTE REQUEST TO NOTICE AMICUS BRIEF SUBMITTED TO U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE & U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY REGARDING MATTERS WITHIN; EX.X IN SUPPORT; filed by Franklin H. Wright. (aaa, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/1/2017) (Entered: 05/01/2017)

May 1, 2017

May 1, 2017

PACER
86

STIPULATION AND ORDER by Hon. William H. Orrick granting 84 Stipulation to extend time to file response to First Amended Complaint. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/1/2017) (Entered: 05/01/2017)

May 1, 2017

May 1, 2017

RECAP
87

Order by Hon. William H. Orrick denying 85 Ex Parte Application as Moot. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/1/2017) (Entered: 05/01/2017)

1 Certificate/Proof of Service

View on PACER

May 1, 2017

May 1, 2017

PACER
88

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Hon. William H. Orrick: Case Management Conference held on 5/2/2017. The hearing set for May 9, 2017 on the City of Richmond's Motion for Preliminary Injunction is VACATED. Close of Fact Discovery: 10/31/2017. Dispositive Motions to be heard by 1/10/2018. Pretrial Conference set for 4/2/2018 02:00 PM and Bench Trial set for 4/23/2018 08:00 AM before Hon. William H. Orrick, both in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco. FTR Time 1:32-2:01. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 5/2/2017) Modified on 5/3/2017: Matter transcribed by Leo Mankiewicz. (rjdS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 05/03/2017)

May 2, 2017

May 2, 2017

RECAP
89

AMENDED 85 EX PARTE REQUEST TO NOTICE AMICUS BRIEF SUBMITTED TO U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE & U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY REGARDING MATTERS WITHIN; DECLARATION OF FRANKLIN H. WRIGHT IN SUPPORT; filed by Franklin H. Wright. Responses due by 5/16/2017. Replies due by 5/23/2017. (aaa, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/2/2017) (Entered: 05/03/2017)

May 2, 2017

May 2, 2017

PACER
90

DECLARATION of FRANKLIN H. WRIGHT in Support of 89 AMENDED MOTION; filed byFranklin H. Wright. (Related document(s) 89 ) (aaa, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/2/2017) (Entered: 05/03/2017)

May 2, 2017

May 2, 2017

PACER
91

ORDER DENYING 89 AMENDED EX PARTE MOTION TO NOTICE AMICUS BRIEF by Judge William H. Orrick. Mr. Wright is instructed not to file any additional papers in this case or in the related Santa Clara and Richmond actions. The court clerk is instructed not to file any of Mr. Wrights papers on the docket. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/4/2017) (Entered: 05/04/2017)

1 Certificate/Proof of Service

View on PACER

May 4, 2017

May 4, 2017

PACER
92

STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER re 86 Order on Stipulation filed by John F Kelly, Jefferson B. Sessions, Donald J. Trump, United States of America. (Simpson, W.) (Filed on 5/5/2017) (Entered: 05/05/2017)

May 5, 2017

May 5, 2017

RECAP
93

Transcript of Proceedings held on 05/02/2017, before Judge William H. Orrick. Court Reporter/Transcriber Leo T. Mankiewicz, CSR, RMR, CRR, telephone number (415) 722-7045; leomank@gmail.com. FTR 1:32 p.m. - 2:02 p.m. = 30 minutes. Per General Order No. 59 and Judicial Conference policy, this transcript may be viewed only at the Clerk's Office public terminal or may be purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber until the deadline for the Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Any Notice of Intent to Request Redaction, if required, is due no later than 5 business days from date of this filing. (Re (103 in 3:17-cv-00574-WHO) Transcript Order ) Redaction Request due 5/30/2017. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 6/8/2017. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 8/7/2017. (Mankiewicz, Leo) (Filed on 5/8/2017) (Entered: 05/08/2017)

May 8, 2017

May 8, 2017

PACER
94

TRANSCRIPT ORDER for proceedings held on May 2, 2017 before Hon. William H. Orrick by City and County of San Francisco, for Court Reporter Leo Mankiewicz. (Lee, Mollie) (Filed on 5/8/2017) (Entered: 05/08/2017)

May 8, 2017

May 8, 2017

PACER
95

TRANSCRIPT ORDER for proceedings held on May 2, 2017 before Hon. William H. Orrick by Anti-Defamation League, for Court Reporter Leo Mankiewicz. (Perrin, Robert) (Filed on 5/8/2017) (Entered: 05/08/2017)

May 8, 2017

May 8, 2017

PACER
96

STIPULATION AND ORDER. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 05/09/2017. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/9/2017) (Entered: 05/09/2017)

May 9, 2017

May 9, 2017

RECAP
97

STIPULATION Re Initial Disclosures filed by City and County of San Francisco. (Lee, Mollie) (Filed on 5/10/2017) (Entered: 05/10/2017)

May 10, 2017

May 10, 2017

PACER
98

Mail sent to Franklin H. Wright returned as undeliverable re 91 Order on Motion to Amend/Correct. (aaaS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/17/2017) (Entered: 05/18/2017)

May 17, 2017

May 17, 2017

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

Immigration and/or the Border

Special Collection(s):

Trump Immigration Enforcement Order Challenges

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Jan. 31, 2017

Closing Date: Aug. 15, 2019

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

City of San Francisco

Plaintiff Type(s):

City/County Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

United States, Federal

U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal

U.S. Department of Justice, Federal

Defendant Type(s):

Jurisdiction-wide

Case Details

Causes of Action:

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

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Federalism (including 10th Amendment)

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Content of Injunction:

Preliminary relief granted

Issues

General:

Funding

Immigration/Border:

Sanctuary city/state

Undocumented immigrants - state and local regulation