Case: OCA-Asian Pacific American Advocates v. Rubio

1:25-cv-00287 | U.S. District Court for the District of District of Columbia

Filed Date: Jan. 30, 2025

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This case, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Jan. 30, 2025, is one of several challenging President Trump's effort to narrow birthright citizenship--the Fourteenth Amendment right to U.S. citizenship to individuals born on U.S. soil and "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." You can see all these cases here. President Trump was sworn in to his second term as President on January 20, 2025, and immediately issued a number of Executive Orders--including Executive Or…

President Trump was sworn in to his second term as President on January 20, 2025, and immediately issued a number of Executive Orders--including Executive Order 14160, which proclaimed that birthright citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment does not apply to children born in the United States when: (1) their mother was unlawfully present in the country and their father was neither a U.S. citizen nor a permanent resident at the time of the child’s birth; or (2) when their mother was lawfully, but temporarily, present in the United States and their father was neither a U.S. citizen nor a permanent resident.

The Asian Pacific American Advocates (OCA)-- a nonprofit, membership-based organization whose mission is to advance the social, political, and economic well-being of Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders-- filed this lawsuit in the District of District of Columbia. Plaintiff alleged that the Executive Order violated the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, statutory protection of birthright citizenship under 8 U.S.C. § 1401, and the Administrative Procedure Act under 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(B) and § 706(2)(C). The lawsuit sought an injunction barring the defendants from enforcing the Executive Order, which was scheduled to go into effect on February 19, 2025, and a declaratory judgment that the Executive Order is unconstitutional and unlawful. Plaintiff was represented by lawyers from Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer, Asian Americans Advancing Justice, and the Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs. The case was assigned to Judge Timothy Kelly.

On April 14, the government filed a motion to stay the proceedings in this case pending expedited appeals of three nationwide injunctions regarding EO 14160. The court denied a stay on May 14, finding that the defendants would not suffer much (if any) harm from continuing the litigation and that staying the litigation would not promote efficient use of the court's resources.

The defendants filed a motion to dismiss, or, in the alternative, for summary judgment, on June 18. The defendants first argued that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring their case; that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim, since the Fourteenth Amendment does not supply a cause of action on its own; and that the plaintiffs failed to identify final agency action as required by the APA. Instead, Congress intended this type of claim to be channeled through the INA. The defendants also argued that they were entitled to summary judgment on the merits, since the "Supreme Court has held that a person is 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States under the Citizenship Clause if he is born in the allegiance and under the protection of the country." Thus, the defendants argued that the EO is in keeping with this interpretation by the Supreme Court.

On June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court issued its decision in State of Washington v. Trump, Casa Inc. v. Trump, and New Jersey v. Trump, each of which challenged universal preliminary injunctions barring implementation of the Executive Order. 2025 WL 1773631. The Supreme Court decided that universal injunctions likely exceed the equitable powers that Congress has given to federal courts if such injunctions provide relief to individuals or entities who are not parties before the court. The correct principle, the Court ruled, was complete relief for the parties, but no more. Therefore, it partially stayed the injunctions issued in these cases, but only to the extent that the injunctions were broader than necessary. Specifically, the Court found that the injunctions were likely overbroad with regard to the individual plaintiffs in these cases, since an injunction barring enforcement only against the individual plaintiffs would give them complete relief. On the other hand, the Court declined to rule on whether the injunctions were overbroad with regard to the State plaintiffs, instead remanding the case to the respective district courts to consider that question in the first instance.

On July 1, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint seeking class certification. The amended complaint added three individual plaintiffs, including two mothers and one child, and adjusted the defendants to reflect the current Attorney General and Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. The amended complaint also adds a new claim for relief under the Fifth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Finally, the amended complaint asks the court to certify a class (consisting of the following two subclasses): (1) All individuals who are ‘unlawfully present’ or temporarily present and have given or will give birth after February 19, 2025 to a child (i) on American soil, (ii) whose father is not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident; and (2) All individual children who have been born on American soil after February 19, 2025 (i) whose mother is ‘unlawfully present’ or temporarily present and (ii) whose father is not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.

On July 2, the plaintiffs also filed a cross-motion for summary judgment, arguing that the EO clearly violates the text of the Citizenship Clause.

This case is ongoing.

show full summary

Summary Authors

Nicole Brigstock (4/21/2025)

Jeremiah Price (6/19/2025)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69595158/parties/oca-asian-pacific-american-advocates-v-rubio/

Judge(s)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Banner, Kaitlin Rose (District of Columbia)

Baron, Noah (District of Columbia)

Bessell, Sarah L. (District of Columbia)

Freedman, John Arak (District of Columbia)

Attorney for Defendant

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Crapo, Matt A. (District of Columbia)

Judge(s)

Kelly, Timothy James (District of Columbia)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Banner, Kaitlin Rose (District of Columbia)

Baron, Noah (District of Columbia)

Bessell, Sarah L. (District of Columbia)

Freedman, John Arak (District of Columbia)

Gates, Madeleine (District of Columbia)

Shah, Niyati (District of Columbia)

Attorney for Defendant

Graham-Oliver, Heather D. (District of Columbia)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Crapo, Matt A. (District of Columbia)

Hajec, Christopher Joseph (District of Columbia)

Attorney Contact Information via CourtListener

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

	Document
1 1:25-cv-00287	Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief	Jan. 30, 2025	Jan. 30, 2025 Complaint
19 1:25-cv-00287	Memorandum Order	May 14, 2025	May 14, 2025 Order/Opinion 2025 WL 1393153
29-1 1:25-cv-00287	Exhibit A	July 1, 2025	July 1, 2025 Other
29 1:25-cv-00287	Plaintiffs' Notice of Amended Complaint Filed as a Matter of Course	July 1, 2025	July 1, 2025 Pleading / Motion / Brief

show / hide documents

Resources

Title	Description		External URL Date / External URL
EO 14160 - Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship President Donald Trump	Declaring that the privilege of United States citizenship does not automatically extend to persons born in the United States: (1) when that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United State…	Jan. 20, 2025	Jan. 20, 2025 https://www.federalregister.gov/...

show / hide resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69595158/oca-asian-pacific-american-advocates-v-rubio/

Last updated July 13, 2025, 1:29 p.m.

ECF Number	Description	Date	Link Date / Link
1	COMPLAINT against MICHELLE KING, JAMES MCHENRY, KRISTI NOEM, MARCO RUBIO, DONALD J. TRUMP, U.S DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, U.S. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number ADCDC-11446023) filed by OCA - ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN ADVOCATES. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Summons - MARCO RUBIO, # 3 Summons - U.S DEPARTMENT OF STATE, # 4 Summons - JAMES MCHENRY, # 5 Summons - U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, # 6 Summons - KRISTI NOEM, # 7 Summons - U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, # 8 Summons - MICHELLE KING, # 9 Summons - U.S. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, # 10 Summons - DONALD J. TRUMP)(Freedman, John) (Entered: 01/30/2025) 1 Civil Cover Sheet View on RECAP 2 Summons - MARCO RUBIO View on RECAP 3 Summons - U.S DEPARTMENT OF STATE View on RECAP 4 Summons - JAMES MCHENRY View on RECAP 5 Summons - U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE View on RECAP 6 Summons - KRISTI NOEM View on RECAP 7 Summons - U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY View on RECAP 8 Summons - MICHELLE KING View on RECAP 9 Summons - U.S. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION View on RECAP 10 Summons - DONALD J. TRUMP View on RECAP	Jan. 30, 2025	Jan. 30, 2025 Clearinghouse
2	REQUEST FOR SUMMONS TO ISSUE Civil Process Clerk U.S. Attorney's Office for D.C. filed by OCA - ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN ADVOCATES.(Freedman, John) (Entered: 01/30/2025)	Jan. 30, 2025	Jan. 30, 2025 RECAP
3	NOTICE of Appearance by Noah Baron on behalf of All Plaintiffs (Baron, Noah) (Entered: 01/30/2025)	Jan. 30, 2025	Jan. 30, 2025 RECAP
	NOTICE OF NEW CASE ERROR regarding 1 Complaint,,. The following error(s) need correction: Noncompliance with LCvR 5.1(c). Please file a Notice of Errata stating the error and attach the corrected initiating pleading to include the name & full residence address of each party and file using the event Errata. COMPLIANCE DEADLINE is by close of business today. This case will not proceed any further until all errors are satisfied. (zmtm)	Jan. 31, 2025	Jan. 31, 2025 PACER
4	ERRATA - NOTICE OF ERRATA RE: MISSING ADDRESSES IN COMPLAINT by OCA - ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN ADVOCATES re 1 Complaint,,. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit - Corrected Complaint)(Freedman, John) (Entered: 01/31/2025)	Jan. 31, 2025	Jan. 31, 2025 PACER
	Case Assigned to Judge Timothy J. Kelly. (zmtm)	Jan. 31, 2025	Jan. 31, 2025 PACER
5	SUMMONS (10) Issued Electronically as to All Defendants, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (Attachments: # 1 Notice and Consent)(zmtm) (Entered: 01/31/2025)	Jan. 31, 2025	Jan. 31, 2025 PACER
6	STANDING ORDER. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 1/31/2025. (lctjk2) (Entered: 01/31/2025)	Jan. 31, 2025	Jan. 31, 2025 RECAP
7	NOTICE of Appearance by Sarah L. Bessell on behalf of All Plaintiffs (Bessell, Sarah) (Main Document 7 replaced on 2/7/2025) (znmw). (Entered: 02/07/2025)	Feb. 7, 2025	Feb. 7, 2025 PACER
8	NOTICE of Appearance by Madeleine Gates on behalf of All Plaintiffs (Gates, Madeleine) (Entered: 02/07/2025)	Feb. 7, 2025	Feb. 7, 2025 PACER
9	NOTICE of Appearance by Kaitlin Rose Banner on behalf of All Plaintiffs (Banner, Kaitlin) (Main Document 9 replaced on 2/7/2025) (znmw). (Entered: 02/07/2025)	Feb. 7, 2025	Feb. 7, 2025 PACER
	NOTICE of Provisional/Government Not Certified Status re 9 NOTICE of Appearance by Kaitlin Rose Banner on behalf of All Plaintiffs (Banner, Kaitlin) (Main Document 9 replaced on 2/7/2025) (znmw)..Your attorney renewal/government certification has not been received. As a result, your membership with the U.S. District & Bankruptcy Courts for the District of Columbia is not in good standing, and you are not permitted to file. Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 83.9, you must immediately correct your membership status by following the appropriate instructions on this page of our website: https://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/attorney-renewal. Please be advised that the presiding judge in this case has been notified that you are currently not in good standing to file in this court. Renewal Due by 2/14/2025. (zhcn)	Feb. 7, 2025	Feb. 7, 2025 PACER
	RESOLVED.....NOTICE of Provisional/Government Not Certified Status re 9 NOTICE of Appearance by Kaitlin Rose Banner on behalf of All Plaintiffs (Banner, Kaitlin) (Main Document 9 replaced on 2/7/2025) (znmw)..Your attorney renewal/government certification has not been received. As a result, your membership with the U.S. District & Bankruptcy Courts for the District of Columbia is not in good standing, and you are not permitted to file. Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 83.9, you must immediately correct your membership status by following the appropriate instructions on this page of our website: https://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/attorney-renewal. Please be advised that the presiding judge in this case has been notified that you are currently not in good standing to file in this court. Renewal Due by 2/14/2025. (zhcn) Modified on 2/12/2025 (zhcn).	Feb. 7, 2025	Feb. 7, 2025 PACER
	Notice of Provisional/Government Not Certified Status	Feb. 10, 2025	Feb. 10, 2025 PACER
10	RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed as to the United States Attorney. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney on 2/4/2025. Answer due for ALL FEDERAL DEFENDANTS by 4/5/2025. (Freedman, John) (Entered: 02/11/2025)	Feb. 11, 2025	Feb. 11, 2025 RECAP
11	NOTICE of Appearance by Niyati Shah on behalf of All Plaintiffs (Shah, Niyati) (Entered: 03/03/2025)	March 3, 2025	March 3, 2025 PACER
12	NOTICE of Appearance by Heather D. Graham-Oliver on behalf of All Defendants (Graham-Oliver, Heather) (Entered: 04/07/2025)	April 7, 2025	April 7, 2025 PACER
13	MOTION for Extension of Time to File A Response To Complaint by MICHELLE KING, JAMES MCHENRY, KRISTI NOEM, MARCO A. RUBIO, DONALD J. TRUMP, U.S DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, U.S. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION. (Graham-Oliver, Heather) (Entered: 04/07/2025)	April 7, 2025	April 7, 2025 RECAP
14	RESPONSE re 13 MOTION for Extension of Time to File A Response To Complaint filed by OCA - ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN ADVOCATES. (Freedman, John) (Entered: 04/08/2025)	April 8, 2025	April 8, 2025 RECAP
	MINUTE ORDER denying without prejudice Defendants' 13 Motion for Extension of Time. Before the Court is Defendants' 13 Motion for Extension of Time. In that motion, Defendants seek to extend the deadline to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's 1 Complaint so that they may "file a Motion to Stay the proceedings." ECF No. 13 at 1. Plaintiff does not consent to this aspect of Defendants' 13 Motion. ECF No. 14 at 1. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1), a court may, in its discretion, extend a deadline upon a showing of "good cause." See also Cooper v. DOJ, 169 F. Supp. 3d 20, 45 (D.D.C. 2016). While Defendants' 13 Motion requests the extension so that Defendants' counsel may "further review the pleadings as pertains to this case as well as the other cases filed concerning the [challenged] Executive Order and to file a motion to stay these proceedings," Defendants appear to have had access to the relevant pleadings--both in this case and in the other identified cases--for at least two months. And despite Defendants' conclusory assertion of "good cause shown," ECF No. 13 at 2, they do not explain why they were unable to file any response to the 1 Complaint--or the contemplated motion to stay--before the expiration of the current deadline. Additionally, Paragraph 10 of the Court's 6 Standing Order requires parties to submit extension motions "at least four days prior to the deadline at issue." ECF No. 6 ¶ 10 (emphasis omitted). "If a party cannot comply with this four-day requirement, it shall explain why it cannot do so in its motion." Instead of being filed four days prior to the relevant deadline, Defendants' 13 Motion was filed only twenty minutes before their response to the 1 Complaint was due. And Defendants' 13 Motion does not explain why Defendants failed to comply with the Court's 6 Standing Order. Thus, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendants' 13 Motion for Extension of Time is DENIED without prejudice. Defendants may renew their motion, and show "good cause" for the requested extension and "explain why" they failed to comply with the Court's 6 Standing Order, by April 11, 2025, at 5:00 p.m. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 4/9/2025. (lctjk2)	April 9, 2025	April 9, 2025 PACER
	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to AND Set/Reset Deadlines	April 9, 2025	April 9, 2025 PACER
15	Second MOTION for Extension of Time to File Responsive Pleading by MICHELLE KING, JAMES MCHENRY, KRISTI NOEM, MARCO A. RUBIO, DONALD J. TRUMP, U.S DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, U.S. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION. (Graham-Oliver, Heather) (Entered: 04/11/2025)	April 11, 2025	April 11, 2025 PACER
	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to AND Set/Reset Deadlines	April 14, 2025	April 14, 2025 PACER
	MINUTE ORDER treating as opposed and granting Defendants' 15 Renewed Motion for Extension of Time. Upon consideration of Defendants' 15 Renewed Motion for Extension of Time, and for good cause shown, it is hereby ORDERED, nunc pro tunc to April 7, 2025, that Defendants' 15 Motion is GRANTED. It is further ORDERED that Defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's 1 Complaint by April 14, 2025. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 4/14/2025. (lctjk2)	April 14, 2025	April 14, 2025 PACER
16	MOTION to Stay Proceedings by MICHELLE KING, JAMES MCHENRY, KRISTI NOEM, MARCO A. RUBIO, DONALD J. TRUMP, U.S DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, U.S. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION. (Graham-Oliver, Heather) (Entered: 04/14/2025)	April 14, 2025	April 14, 2025 RECAP
17	Memorandum in opposition to re 16 MOTION to Stay Proceedings filed by OCA - ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN ADVOCATES. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Freedman, John) (Entered: 04/28/2025) 1 Text of Proposed Order View on PACER	April 28, 2025	April 28, 2025 RECAP
18	REPLY to opposition to motion re 16 Motion to Stay, filed by MICHELLE KING, JAMES MCHENRY, KRISTI NOEM, MARCO A. RUBIO, DONALD J. TRUMP, U.S DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, U.S. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION. (Graham-Oliver, Heather) (Entered: 05/05/2025)	May 5, 2025	May 5, 2025 RECAP
19	MEMORANDUM ORDER denying Defendants' 16 Motion to Stay Proceedings and ordering Defendants to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's 1 Complaint by June 4, 2025. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 5/14/2025. (lctjk2) (Entered: 05/14/2025)	May 14, 2025	May 14, 2025 Clearinghouse
20	MOTION for Extension of Time to File Responsive Pleading by MICHELLE KING, JAMES MCHENRY, KRISTI NOEM, MARCO RUBIO, DONALD J. TRUMP, U.S DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (Graham-Oliver, Heather) (Entered: 05/29/2025)	May 29, 2025	May 29, 2025 RECAP
21	Memorandum in opposition to re 20 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Responsive Pleading filed by OCA - ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN ADVOCATES. (Freedman, John) (Entered: 05/30/2025)	May 30, 2025	May 30, 2025 RECAP
	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to AND Set/Reset Deadlines	June 2, 2025	June 2, 2025 PACER
	Minute Order granting in part and denying part Defendants' 20 Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to the Complaint. Upon consideration of Defendants' 20 Motion and Plaintiff's 21 Opposition, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendants' 20 Motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. It is further ORDERED that Defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's 1 Complaint by June 18, 2025. The Court does not anticipate granting any further extensions. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 6/2/2025. (lctjk2)	June 2, 2025	June 2, 2025 PACER
22	MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint by MICHELLE KING, JAMES MCHENRY, KRISTI NOEM, MARCO RUBIO, DONALD J. TRUMP, U.S DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, U.S. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION. (Graham-Oliver, Heather) (Entered: 06/18/2025)	June 18, 2025	June 18, 2025 RECAP
23	MOTION for Summary Judgment by MICHELLE KING, JAMES MCHENRY, KRISTI NOEM, MARCO RUBIO, DONALD J. TRUMP, U.S DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, U.S. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION. (Attachments: # 1 Statement of Facts)(Graham-Oliver, Heather) (Entered: 06/18/2025)	June 18, 2025	June 18, 2025 RECAP
24	Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File Amicus Briefin support of Defendants by IMMIGRATION REFORM LAW INSTITUTE. (Attachments: # 1 Amicus Brief, # 2 Proposed Order)(Hajec, Christopher) (Entered: 06/24/2025) 1 View on RECAP	June 24, 2025	June 24, 2025 RECAP
25	NOTICE of Appearance by Christopher Joseph Hajec on behalf of IMMIGRATION REFORM LAW INSTITUTE (Hajec, Christopher) (Entered: 06/24/2025)	June 24, 2025	June 24, 2025 PACER
26	NOTICE of Appearance by Matt A. Crapo on behalf of IMMIGRATION REFORM LAW INSTITUTE (Crapo, Matt) (Entered: 06/24/2025)	June 24, 2025	June 24, 2025 RECAP
	MINUTE ORDER granting Amicus's 24 Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief. Upon consideration of Amicus's 24 Unopposed Motion, it is hereby ORDERED that the 24 Unopposed Motion is GRANTED. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 6/26/2025. (lctjk2)	June 26, 2025	June 26, 2025 PACER
27	ENTERED IN ERROR.....NOTICE of Amended Complaint by OCA - ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN ADVOCATES, Jane Doe #1, Jane Doe #2, Baby Doe #1 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A (Amended Complaint), # 2 Exhibit B (Redline))(Freedman, John) Modified on 7/1/2025 (znmw). (Entered: 06/30/2025) 1 Exhibit A (Amended Complaint) View on RECAP 2 Exhibit B (Redline) View on RECAP	June 30, 2025	June 30, 2025 RECAP
28	MOTION Proceed Pseudonymously by Baby Doe #1, Jane Doe #1, Jane Doe #2, OCA - ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN ADVOCATES. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Affidavit Jane Doe #1, # 3 Affidavit Jane Doe #2, # 4 Text of Proposed Order)(Freedman, John) Modified event on 7/1/2025 (znmw). (Entered: 06/30/2025) 1 Memorandum in Support View on RECAP 2 Affidavit Jane Doe #1 View on RECAP 3 Affidavit Jane Doe #2 View on RECAP 4 Text of Proposed Order View on RECAP	June 30, 2025	June 30, 2025 RECAP
	NOTICE OF ERROR regarding 27 Notice (Other). The following error(s) need correction: Incorrect event. Please refile using the event Amended Complaint. (znmw)	July 1, 2025	July 1, 2025 PACER
29	AMENDED COMPLAINT against MICHELLE KING, JAMES MCHENRY, KRISTI NOEM, MARCO RUBIO, DONALD J. TRUMP, U.S DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, U.S. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION filed by JANE DOE #2, BABY DOE #1, OCA - ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN ADVOCATES, JANE DOE #1. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A (Amended Complaint), # 2 Exhibit B (Redline))(Freedman, John) (Entered: 07/01/2025) 1 Exhibit A (Amended Complaint) View on Clearinghouse 2 Exhibit B (Redline) View on RECAP	July 1, 2025	July 1, 2025 Clearinghouse
	NOTICE OF ERROR regarding 27 Notice (Other). The following error(s) need correction: Incorrect event. Please refile using the event Amended Complaint. (znmw)	July 1, 2025	July 1, 2025 PACER
	MINUTE ORDER granting Plaintiffs' 28 Motion to Proceed Pseudonymously. Upon consideration of the factors set forth in in re Sealed Case, 931 F.3d 92, 97 (D.C. Cir. 2019), for the reasons set forth in Plaintiffs' 28 Motion, and because Defendants do not oppose the relief sought, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs' 28 Motion is GRANTED. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 7/2/2025. (lctjk2)	July 2, 2025	July 2, 2025 PACER
30	MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment by BABY DOE #1, JANE DOE #1, JANE DOE #2, OCA - ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN ADVOCATES. (Attachments: # 1 Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment, # 2 Plaintiffs' Counterstatement of Disputed Facts, # 3 Plaintiffs' Rule 56 Statement of Material Facts not in Dispute, # 4 Declaration of John A. Freedman, # 5 Exhibit 1, # 6 Exhibit 2, # 7 Exhibit 3, # 8 Exhibit 4, # 9 Exhibit 5, # 10 Expert Declaration of Professor Beth Lew-Williams, # 11 Expert Declaration of Professor Jayesh Rathod, # 12 Declaration of Thu Nguyen, # 13 Declaration of Jane Doe #1, # 14 Supplemental Declaration of Jane Doe #1, # 15 Declaration of Jane Doe #2, # 16 [Proposed] Order)(Freedman, John) (Entered: 07/02/2025) 1 Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summar View on RECAP 2 Plaintiffs' Counterstatement of Disputed Facts View on RECAP 3 Plaintiffs' Rule 56 Statement of Material Facts not in Dispute View on RECAP 4 Declaration of John A. Freedman View on RECAP 5 Exhibit 1 View on RECAP 6 Exhibit 2 View on RECAP 7 Exhibit 3 View on RECAP 8 Exhibit 4 View on RECAP 9 Exhibit 5 View on RECAP 10 Expert Declaration of Professor Beth Lew-Williams View on RECAP 11 Expert Declaration of Professor Jayesh Rathod View on RECAP 12 Declaration of Thu Nguyen View on RECAP 13 Declaration of Jane Doe #1 View on RECAP 14 Supplemental Declaration of Jane Doe #1 View on RECAP 15 Declaration of Jane Doe #2 View on RECAP 16 [Proposed] Order View on RECAP	July 2, 2025	July 2, 2025 RECAP
31	AMICUS BRIEF by IMMIGRATION REFORM LAW INSTITUTE. (zdp)	July 10, 2025	July 10, 2025 RECAP
32	Extension of Time to	July 11, 2025	July 11, 2025 RECAP

show / hide docket entries