Case: Jean-Baptiste v. Reno

1:96-cv-04077 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York

Filed Date: Aug. 19, 1996

Closed Date: 1999

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On August 19, 1996, three permanent resident aliens filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, challenging their deportation orders, which were based on their criminal convictions for drug offenses. Plaintiffs claimed that the INS' deportation procedures violated the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Plaintiffs also claimed that they were not given notice by INS officials or anyone else that engaging in certain types of crimi…

On August 19, 1996, three permanent resident aliens filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, challenging their deportation orders, which were based on their criminal convictions for drug offenses. Plaintiffs claimed that the INS' deportation procedures violated the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Plaintiffs also claimed that they were not given notice by INS officials or anyone else that engaging in certain types of criminal behavior would be grounds for deportation.

The District Court dismissed the case for failure to state a claim. Jean-Baptiste v. Reno, 1997 WL 55472 (E.D.N.Y. Feb 05, 1997). Plaintiffs appealed.

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal, but on other grounds. The Court held that the under Section 242(g) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(g) (Supp. II 1996), the District Court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case. Jean-Baptiste v. Reno, 144 F.3d 212 (2nd Cir. 1998). Rehearing was denied. Jean-Baptiste v. Reno, 175 F.3d 226 (2nd Cir. 1999).

Summary Authors

Dan Dalton (1/4/2008)

People


Judge(s)

Cardamone, Richard J. (New York)

Go, Marilyn D. (New York)

Johnson, Sterling Jr. (New York)

Kearse, Amalya Lyle (New York)

Leisure, Peter Keeton (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Torres, Eladio A. (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Carter, Zachary W. (New York)

Delli-Pizzi, Mary Elizabeth (New York)

Howard, William J. (District of Columbia)

Hunger, Frank W. (District of Columbia)

Judge(s)

Cardamone, Richard J. (New York)

Go, Marilyn D. (New York)

Johnson, Sterling Jr. (New York)

Kearse, Amalya Lyle (New York)

Leisure, Peter Keeton (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Torres, Eladio A. (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Carter, Zachary W. (New York)

Delli-Pizzi, Mary Elizabeth (New York)

Howard, William J. (District of Columbia)

Hunger, Frank W. (District of Columbia)

Keener, Donald E. (District of Columbia)

Radford, Emily Ann (District of Columbia)

Sarko, Michele Y.F. (District of Columbia)

Expert/Monitor/Master

Martinez, Antonio C (New York)

Vu, Quynh (District of Columbia)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

1:96-cv-04077

Docket

Aug. 19, 1996

Aug. 19, 1996

Docket

97-06062

Appellate Court Docket

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

March 20, 1997

March 20, 1997

Docket
1

1:96-cv-04077

Complaint

1996 WL 33670225

Aug. 19, 1996

Aug. 19, 1996

Complaint

1:96-cv-04077

Defendants' Memorandum supporting their Motion to Dismiss

1996 WL 33670191

Oct. 15, 1996

Oct. 15, 1996

Pleading / Motion / Brief
13

1:96-cv-04077

Plaintiffs' Memorandum Opposing Motion to Dismiss

1996 WL 33670192

Oct. 30, 1996

Oct. 30, 1996

Pleading / Motion / Brief

1:96-cv-04077

Defendants' Reply Supporting Motion to Dismiss

1996 WL 33670193

Nov. 13, 1996

Nov. 13, 1996

Pleading / Motion / Brief
22

1:96-cv-04077

Opinion

1997 WL 55472

Feb. 5, 1997

Feb. 5, 1997

Order/Opinion

97-06062

Opinion

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

144 F.3d 212

May 8, 1998

May 8, 1998

Order/Opinion

97-06062

Opinion

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

175 F.3d 226

May 17, 1999

May 17, 1999

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

Last updated Aug. 4, 2022, 3:05 a.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

Case Details

State / Territory: New York

Case Type(s):

Immigration and/or the Border

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Aug. 19, 1996

Closing Date: 1999

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

# permanent resident aliens who challenged their deportation orders which were based on their criminal convictions for drug offenses.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: Unknown

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Denied

Defendants

Office of the Attorney General (Washington), Federal

Immigration and Naturalization Service (Washington), Federal

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Ex Parte Young (Federal) or Bivens

Habeas Corpus, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2241-2253; 2254; 2255

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Issues

General:

Habeas Corpus

Immigration/Border:

Constitutional rights

Deportation - criteria

Deportation - judicial review

Deportation - procedure