Case: U.S. v. State of California

2:18-cv-00490 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California

Filed Date: March 6, 2018

Closed Date: April 6, 2021

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This case challenged California's "sanctuary city" state laws. The United States federal government filed this suit on March 6, 2018 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California. The case was assigned to Judge John A. Mendez and Magistrate Kendall J. Newman. This lawsuit comes after a series of lawsuits filed by California jurisdictions challenging the federal government's sanctuary city policies, which deny federal funding to jurisdictions that impede the federal governmen…

This suit challenged three California laws in particular: (1) the Immigrant Worker Protection Act ("AB 450") that prohibits private employers from voluntarily cooperating with federal officials without a judicial warrant or subpoena for purposes of immigration enforcement, (2) Assembly Bill 103 ("AB 103") that requires the state attorney general to investigate federal immigration detention facilities and processes, and (3) Senate Bill 54 ("SB 54") that limits local law enforcement from providing information about or transferring individuals subject to federal immigration custody to federal enforcement. The U.S. argued that the three laws "reflect a deliberate effort by California to obstruct the United States’ enforcement of federal immigration law," that the federal law preempted the state laws, and that the federal government had "preeminent authority" regarding immigration. The U.S. argued that California therefore violated the Supremacy Clause and that the Supremacy Clause rendered the state laws invalid. The U.S. sought declaratory and injunctive relief.

The same day, the U.S. moved for preliminary injunction. It sought to enjoin the implementation of these provisions within the three California laws. Meanwhile, a series of entities filed amici briefs and California moved to dismiss the case on May 4, 2018. A hearing on both motions was held on June 28.

On July 5, 2018, Judge Mendez granted in part and denied in part the motion for preliminary injunction, holding that "AB 103, SB 54, and the employee notice provision of AB 450 are permissible exercises of California’s sovereign power," but that the other provisions of AB 450 "impermissibly infringed on the sovereignty of the United States." As to AB 103, the court found that there was no indication "Congress intended for States to have no oversight over detention facilities operating within their borders," that AB 103 did not otherwise conflict with federal law, and that its burden on detention facilities is minimal since it did not impose any substantive requirements upon detention facilities but rather merely requires the detention facility to allow for access to review it. The court upheld AB 450's requirement that employers provide notice to their employees of any upcoming I-9 inspection but struck down under the supremacy clause the provisions prohibiting employers from verifying employment eligibility when federal law did not so require and from consenting to let immigration enforcement agents enter nonpublic labor areas to access, review, or obtain employee records. Finally, the court held that SB 54 did not conflict with federal law requiring information sharing, that the federal law was further potentially unconstitutional, and that California merely refusing to help federal law enforcement was different from impermissibly impeding federal law enforcement. 314 F.Supp.3d 1077.

On July 9, 2018, Judge Mendez granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss for the reasons stated above. The court dismissed the government's supremacy clause claim against AB 103, its claim against AB 450's notice provision, and its supremacy clause claim against SB 54. The court maintained the government's claims against AB 450's consent, access, and reverification provisions. 2018 WL 3361055. The U.S. immediately appealed the two decisions to the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

The Ninth Circuit issued its decision on April 18, 2019. 921 F.3d 865. The court affirmed in part and reversed in part the district court's denial in large part of the government's motion for a preliminary injunction. First, the court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction with respect to AB 450, agreeing with Judge Mendez that it neither burdens the federal government nor conflicts with federal activities. Next, the court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction with respect to those provisions of AB 103 that simply duplicate inspection requirements mandated by California law. However, the court concluded that one subsection of AB 103, which requires examination of the circumstances surrounding the apprehension and transfer of immigration detainees, "discriminates against and impermissibly burdens the federal government, and so is unlawful under the doctrine of intergovernmental immunity." With respect to SB 54, the court affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, agreeing with Judge Mendez that any obstruction caused by the law is consistent with the State's prerogatives under the 10th Amendment and anti-commandeering rule. It also found that SB 54's information-sharing restrictions did not conflict with federal law. The court then remanded for reconsideration of the equitable factors relevant to the question of whether to issue a preliminary injunction as applied to AB 103.

The U.S. filed a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court requesting review. Back in the district court, Judge Mendez stayed the proceedings pending the Supreme Court’s decision on certiorari. On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court denied certiorari. 141 S.Ct. 124. Judge Mendez lifted the stay and the parties began briefing on whether to issue a preliminary injunction as applied to AB 103. The defendants also filed a motion to dissolve the existing injunction. Oral arguments were set for January 2021, but after the election of President Joseph Biden, the district court continued hearing on the motions. It asked the U.S. to inform the court if the U.S. after review by the Biden Administration, planned to continue pursuing this case.

On April 5, 2021, the parties entered into a Joint Stipulation of Dismissal. The court ordered the clerk to close the case on April 6, 2021. The case is now closed.

	Document
2:18-cv-00490	Docket [PACER] United States of America v. State of California	April 19, 2019	April 19, 2019 Docket
2-1 2:18-00264	Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Memorandum of Law in Support	March 6, 2018	March 6, 2018 Pleading / Motion / Brief
1 2:18-00264	Complaint	March 6, 2018	March 6, 2018 Complaint
44 2:18-cv-00490	Brief of Amici Curiae in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for a Preliminary Injunction United States v. State of California	March 30, 2018	March 30, 2018 Pleading / Motion / Brief
43 2:18-cv-00490	Amicus Curiae Brief of the American Center for Law and Justice in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction United States v. State of California	March 30, 2018	March 30, 2018 Pleading / Motion / Brief
48 2:18-cv-00490	Brief Amici Curiae of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation and Michael Rushford Supporting Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction United States v. State of California	April 6, 2018	April 6, 2018 Pleading / Motion / Brief
57 2:18-cv-00490	Municipalities & Elected Officials' Amici Curiae Brief United States v. State of California	April 12, 2018	April 12, 2018 Pleading / Motion / Brief
56 2:18-cv-00490	Amici Curiae Brief of Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association and National Border Patrol Council in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction United States v. State of California	April 12, 2018	April 12, 2018 Pleading / Motion / Brief
55 2:18-cv-00490	Amici Curiae Brief of National Sheriffs' Association and Victims' Organizations in Support of Plaintiff United States v. State of California	April 12, 2018	April 12, 2018 Pleading / Motion / Brief
112 2:18-cv-00490	Brief of Amicus Curiae City and County of San Francisco in Support of Defendant's Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction United States v. State of California	May 18, 2018	May 18, 2018 Pleading / Motion / Brief

ECF Number	Description	Date	Link Date / Link
1	COMPLAINT against All Defendants by United States of America. Attorney Reuveni, Erez added. (Reuveni, Erez) (Entered: 03/06/2018)	March 6, 2018	March 6, 2018 RECAP
2	MOTION for PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION by United States of America. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Exhibit, # 5 Exhibit, # 6 Proposed Order)(Reuveni, Erez) Modified on 4/3/2018 (Mena-Sanchez, L). (Entered: 03/06/2018) 1 Memorandum View on RECAP 2 Exhibit View on RECAP 3 Exhibit View on RECAP 4 Exhibit View on RECAP 5 Exhibit View on PACER 6 Proposed Order View on PACER	March 6, 2018	March 6, 2018 RECAP
3	CIVIL COVER SHEET by United States of America (Reuveni, Erez) (Entered: 03/06/2018)	March 6, 2018	March 6, 2018 PACER
4	SUMMONS ISSUED as to Xavier Becerra, Edmund Gerald Brown, Jr., State of California with answer to complaint due within 21 days. Attorney Erez Reuveni US Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation P.O. Box 868 Washington, DC 20044. (Donati, J) (Entered: 03/06/2018)	March 6, 2018	March 6, 2018 PACER
5	CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED (Attachments: # 1 Consent Form, # 2 Order re Filing Requirements, # 3 VDRP) (Donati, J) (Entered: 03/06/2018) 1 Consent Form View on PACER 2 Order re Filing Requirements View on PACER 3 VDRP View on PACER	March 6, 2018	March 6, 2018 PACER
6	MOTION for enlargement of page limit for memorandum in support of 2 motion for preliminary injunction by United States of America. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Reuveni, Erez) Modified on 3/7/2018 (Zignago, K.). (Entered: 03/07/2018) 1 Proposed Order View on RECAP	March 7, 2018	March 7, 2018 PACER
7	MINUTE ORDER: Plaintiffs Request for Leave to File its Memorandum in Support of its Motion for Preliminary Injunction in Excess of the Page Limit, ECF No. 6, is GRANTED. The page restrictions outlined in the Courts Order re Filing Requirements, ECF No. 5-2, are suspended in relation to the pending Motion for Preliminary Injunction only. Defendants Opposition shall not exceed forty pages. Plaintiffs Reply shall not exceed twenty-five pages. The parties should file a stipulation as to the briefing schedule by Friday, March 9, 2018. Should the parties be unable to reach an agreement, the Court will set the schedule and hearing date. (TEXT ENTRY ONLY) (Vine, H) (Entered: 03/07/2018)	March 7, 2018	March 7, 2018 PACER
8	SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED: State of California, Edmund Gerald Brown, Jr. and Xavier Becerra served on 3/7/2018. (Reuveni, Erez) Modified on 3/8/2018 (Donati, J). (Entered: 03/08/2018)	March 8, 2018	March 8, 2018 PACER
9	NOTICE of RELATED CASE 18-322 by United States of America. (Reuveni, Erez) (Entered: 03/08/2018)	March 8, 2018	March 8, 2018 RECAP
10	PROPOSED BRIEFING SCHEDULE by Plaintiff United States of America re: 2 Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Reuveni, Erez) Modified on 3/9/2018 (Donati, J). (Entered: 03/09/2018) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	March 9, 2018	March 9, 2018 RECAP
11	NOTICE of APPEARANCE by Lee I. Sherman on behalf of State of California, Edmund Gerald Brown, Jr. and Xavier Becerra. Attorney Sherman, Lee I. added. (Sherman, Lee) Modified on 3/9/2018 (Donati, J). (Entered: 03/09/2018)	March 9, 2018	March 9, 2018 RECAP
12	NON-RELATED ORDER signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on March 9, 2018 ORDERING that the court determined that it is INAPPROPRIATE to relate or reassign the cases, and therefore DECLINES to do so. (Munoz, I) Modified on 3/9/2018 (Donati, J).	March 9, 2018	March 9, 2018 RECAP
13	[DISREGARD- DUPLICATE of 11 Notice of Appearance] NOTICE of APPEARANCE by Lee I. Sherman on behalf of Xavier Becerra, Edmund Gerald Brown, Jr, State of California. (Sherman, Lee) Modified on 3/9/2018 (Donati, J). (Entered: 03/09/2018)	March 9, 2018	March 9, 2018 RECAP
14	PROPOSED BREFING SCHEDULE by Xavier Becerra, Edmund Gerald Brown, Jr., State of California. (Sherman, Lee) Modified on 3/12/2018 (Reader, L). (Entered: 03/09/2018)	March 9, 2018	March 9, 2018 RECAP
15	NOTICE of APPEARANCE by Christine Chuang on behalf of Xavier Becerra, Edmund Gerald Brown, Jr, State of California. Attorney Chuang, Christine added. (Chuang, Christine) (Entered: 03/11/2018)	March 11, 2018	March 11, 2018 PACER
16	RESPONSE by United States of America to 14 Scheduling Report. (Reuveni, Erez) (Entered: 03/12/2018)	March 12, 2018	March 12, 2018 RECAP
17	MINUTE ORDER: The parties are ordered not to file any further statements, responses, or arguments, see ECF Nos. 10, 14, 16, not specifically authorized or requested by the Court, see ECF No. 7 (requesting a stipulation by the parties). Only formal motions that comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Courts Local Rules, and this Courts Order re filing Requirements, ECF No. 5-2, will be considered by the Court. The Court authorizes Defendants to file their motion to transfer and the Court will decide this motion on shortened time. Defendants opening brief in support of the motion to transfer is due by March 13, 2018. Plaintiffs opposition is due March 20, 2018, and Defendants reply is due March 23, 2018. No hearing on this motion will be set as the Court will decide the motion on the papers. See E.D. Local Rule 230(g). Any motion for expedited discovery shall be filed with the assigned Magistrate Judge in this case, Kendall J. Newman. The parties are instructed to discuss a briefing schedule and contact Magistrate Judge Newmans chambers by the close of business tomorrow. The final briefing schedule for Plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction is, of course, dependent on the Courts rulings with respect to the motion to transfer and/or motion for expedited discovery. For now, amicus briefs in support of Plaintiffs motion are due March 26, 2018. Defendants opposition, amicus briefs in support of Defendant, Plaintiffs reply, and the hearing date on the Motion for Preliminary Injunction will, if necessary, be set following resolution of the motion to transfer. (TEXT ENTRY ONLY) (Vine, H) (Entered: 03/12/2018)	March 12, 2018	March 12, 2018 PACER
18	MOTION to TRANSFER VENUE to the Northern District of California by Xavier Becerra, Edmund Gerald Brown, Jr, State of California. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Chuang, Christine) Modified on 3/15/2018 (Reader, L). (Entered: 03/13/2018) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	March 13, 2018	March 13, 2018 RECAP
19	REQUEST for JUDICIAL NOTICE by Xavier Becerra, Edmund Gerald Brown, Jr, State of California. re 18 Motion to transfer venue. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A through I)(Chuang, Christine) Modified on 3/15/2018 (Reader, L). (Entered: 03/13/2018) 1 Exhibit A through I View on RECAP	March 13, 2018	March 13, 2018 PACER
20	ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 3/14/2018 ORDERING that, no later than 3/19/2018 at 4:00 PM Pacific Time, the parties shall file a joint letter brief re expedited discovery. The parties' joint letter brief shall not exceed 10 pages. Upon review of the parties joint letter brief, the court may elect to entertain oral argument or may submit the matter for decision without oral argument on the record and written briefing. If the court elects to entertain oral argument, it will be conducted on 3/21/2018, at 3:00 PM Pacific Time, in Courtroom No. 25 before the undersigned. The parties shall set aside that time in the interim for a potential court appearance. Telephonic appearances will be permitted. (Zignago, K.)	March 14, 2018	March 14, 2018 RECAP
21	ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 03/15/2018 CLARIFYING 20 Order: 1) Prior to the 3/19/2018 filing of the joint letter brief, parties are EXPECTED to meet and confer, which should include voice-to-voice dialogue; 2) To initiat e such meet-and-confer efforts, the State of California shall promptly identify and provide to the United States what discovery is sought; 3) The parties shall the COOPERATIVELY prepare the joint letter brief; and 4) The joint letter brief shall not exceed 10 pages, in Times New Roman pt. 12 or equivalent font. (Donati, J)	March 15, 2018	March 15, 2018 RECAP
22	JOINT LETTER BRIEF by Xavier Becerra, Edmund Gerald Brown, Jr, State of California. Attorney Hakl, Anthony R. added. (Hakl, Anthony) Modified on 3/20/2018 (Mena-Sanchez, L). (Entered: 03/19/2018)	March 19, 2018	March 19, 2018 RECAP
23	MINUTE ORDER issued by Courtroom Deputy for Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 3/19/2018: Upon review of the joint letter brief (ECF No. 22 ), the Court CONFIRMS the 3/21/2018 discovery hearing at 03:00 PM (Pacific Time) in Courtroom 25 (KJN) before Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman. Counsel appearing by telephone for the hearing are instructed to call 5 minutes prior to the hearing into the conference line 1-888-363-4734 and use the access code 1245690 plus # and security code 4223 plus # when prompted. (TEXT ONLY ENTRY) (Waldrop, A) (Entered: 03/19/2018)	March 19, 2018	March 19, 2018 PACER
24	NOTICE of APPEARANCE by August Edward Flentje on behalf of United States of America. Attorney Flentje, August Edward added. (Flentje, August) (Entered: 03/20/2018)	March 20, 2018	March 20, 2018 PACER
25	OPPOSITION by United States of America to 18 Motion to Transfer Venue. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Press, Joshua) (Entered: 03/20/2018) 1 Exhibit A View on PACER	March 20, 2018	March 20, 2018 PACER
26	MINUTES (Text Only) for proceedings before Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman: DISCOVERY HEARING held on 3/21/2018. Counsel for parties present. The Court and counsel discussed discovery related issues in the case. Order to issue. Plaintiff's Counsel David Shelledy, Lauren Bingham, and August Flentje present. Defendants' Counsel Anthony Hakl and Lee Sherman present. Court Reporter: Kimberly Bennett. (Waldrop, A) (Entered: 03/21/2018)	March 21, 2018	March 21, 2018 PACER
27	TRANSCRIPT REQUEST by Xavier Becerra, Edmund Gerald Brown, Jr, State of California for proceedings held on March 21, 2018 before Judge Kendall J. Newman. Court Reporter Kimberly Bennett. (Sherman, Lee) (Entered: 03/22/2018)	March 22, 2018	March 22, 2018 PACER
28	ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 3/22/2018 GRANTING-IN-PART and DENYING-IN-PART California's Request for Expedited Discovery. California may depose Thomas D. Moman and Todd Hoffman on the terms outlined in the order. No late r than 3/23/2018 at 12:00 pm. Pacific Time, California shall provide the United States a list of paragraphs in the deponents' declarations containing alleged specific facts of irreparable injury for which existing supportive documents should be produced at the depositions. Any request for expedited discovery beyond the parameters of this order is DENIED. (Donati, J)	March 22, 2018	March 22, 2018 RECAP
29	TRANSCRIPT REQUEST by United States of America for proceedings held on March 21, 2018 before Judge Kendall J. Newman. Court Reporter Kimberly Bennett. (Shelledy, David) (Entered: 03/23/2018)	March 23, 2018	March 23, 2018 PACER
30	REPLY by Xavier Becerra, Edmund Gerald Brown, Jr, State of California re 18 Motion to Transfer Venue. (Attachments: # 1 Request for Judicial Notice & Exhibits A-D) (Sherman, Lee) (Entered: 03/23/2018) 1 Request for Judicial Notice & Exhibits A-D View on PACER	March 23, 2018	March 23, 2018 PACER
31	MOTION for 11-DAY EXTENSION OF TIME by United States of America to Allow Amicus Filings On Plaintiff's Behalf re 17 Minute Order. (Press, Joshua) Modified on 3/26/2018 (Donati, J). (Entered: 03/23/2018)	March 23, 2018	March 23, 2018 RECAP
32	MOTION for LEAVE to FILE AMICI CURIAE BRIEF by the American Center for Law and Justice. Attorney Kozina, Vladimir F. added. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Amicus Curiae Brief, # 2 Proposed Order)(Kozina, Vladimir) Modified on 3/26/2018 (Donati, J). (Entered: 03/26/2018) 1 Proposed Amicus Curiae Brief View on PACER 2 Proposed Order View on PACER	March 26, 2018	March 26, 2018 PACER
33	[DISREGARD- DUPLICATE of 32 Motion ] MOTION for LEAVE by the American Center for Law and Justice to filed Amicus Curiae in support of 2 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Amicus Curiae Brief, # 2 Proposed Order)(Kozina, Vladimir) Modified on 3/26/2018 (Donati, J). (Entered: 03/26/2018) 1 Exhibit Amicus Curiae Brief Supporting Plaintiff's Motion View on PACER 2 Proposed Order View on PACER	March 26, 2018	March 26, 2018 PACER
34	MINUTE ORDER (Text Only) issued by Courtroom Deputy J. Streeter for District Judge John A. Mendez on 03/26/2018: The United States' Motion for 11-Day Extension of Time for Amicus Filings on Plaintiff's Behalf, ECF No. 31, is GRANTED. Amicus briefs in support of Plaintiff's motion are now due April 6, 2018. (Streeter, J) (Entered: 03/26/2018)	March 26, 2018	March 26, 2018 PACER
35	NOTICE of APPEARANCE by David Jonathan Hacker on behalf of State of Texas, State of Alabama, State of Arkansas, State of Florida, State of Georgia, State of Indiana, State of Kansas, State of Louisiana, State of Michigan, State of Missouri, State of Nebraska, State Of Nevada, State of Ohio, State of Oklahoma, State of South Carolina, State of West Virginia, Phil Bryant, Paul Lepage. (Hacker, David) (Entered: 03/26/2018)	March 26, 2018	March 26, 2018 PACER
36	MOTION for LEAVE to FILE AMICI CURIAE BRIEF by Phil Bryant, Paul Lepage, State Of Nevada, State of Alabama, State of Arkansas, State of Florida, State of Georgia, State of Indiana, State of Kansas, State of Louisiana, State of Michigan, State of Missouri, State of Nebraska, State of Ohio, State of Oklahoma, State of South Carolina, State of Texas, State of West Virginia to file Amicus Curiae in support of 2 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Amicus Curiae Brief, # 2 Proposed Order)(Hacker, David) Modified on 3/26/2018 (Donati, J). (Entered: 03/26/2018) 1 Proposed Amicus Curiae Brief View on RECAP 2 Proposed Order View on PACER	March 26, 2018	March 26, 2018 RECAP
37	MINUTE ORDER (Text Only) issued by Courtroom Deputy J. Streeter for District Judge John A. Mendez on 03/27/2018: Amici curiae are advised that the Court will only consider briefing that helps the Court beyond the help the lawyers for the parties are able to provide; duplicative or cumulative arguments will not be considered. Amici should substantially comply with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 29(a), except that parties should look to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules for guidance as to form. Briefs shall not exceed 15 pages. (Streeter, J) (Entered: 03/27/2018)	March 27, 2018	March 27, 2018 PACER
38	STIPULATION for EXTENSION of TIME to Respond to 1 Complaint until 4/25/2018. (Sherman, Lee) Modified on 3/28/2018 (Donati, J). (Entered: 03/27/2018)	March 27, 2018	March 27, 2018 RECAP
39	ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 3/29/2018 DENYING 18 Motion to Transfer Case to the Northern District of California. (Donati, J)	March 29, 2018	March 29, 2018 RECAP
40	TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings held on 3/21/18, before Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman, filed by Court Reporter Kimberly Bennett, Phone number 916-442-8420 E-mail reporter.bennett@gmail.com. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Any Notice of Intent to Request Redaction must be filed within 5 court days. Redaction Request due 4/19/2018. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 4/30/2018. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 6/28/2018. (Bennett, K) (Entered: 03/29/2018)	March 29, 2018	March 29, 2018 PACER

Case: U.S. v. State of California

2:18-cv-00490 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California

Case Summary

People

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Docket

Case Details