Case: Villegas v. Silverman

03-00208 | Indiana state trial court

Filed Date: Aug. 26, 2002

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

In August 2002, several undocumented immigrants brought a class-action lawsuit in Indiana state court (Marion Superior Court), challenging identification requirements that were issued by the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles (BMV) for obtaining driver's licenses or identification cards. Under the new requirements, applicants were required to show proof of a Social Security Number and U.S. citizenship or lawful immigration status. Plaintiffs were represented by the Indiana ACLU and private couns…

In August 2002, several undocumented immigrants brought a class-action lawsuit in Indiana state court (Marion Superior Court), challenging identification requirements that were issued by the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles (BMV) for obtaining driver's licenses or identification cards. Under the new requirements, applicants were required to show proof of a Social Security Number and U.S. citizenship or lawful immigration status. Plaintiffs were represented by the Indiana ACLU and private counsel and sought declaratory and injunctive relief. Specifically, plaintiffs asserted that the regulation violated the Equal Protection Clause, the Due Process Clause, and the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, as well as the Indiana Administrative Rules and Procedures Act.

In March 2004, the parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. Following a hearing on the dispositive motions, the Marion Superior Court (Judge Patrick L. McCarty) entered judgment in favor of the BMV, finding that plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the BMV regulation. Plaintiffs appealed.

The Indiana Court of Appeals (Judges Michael P. Barnes, Melissa S. May, and Nancy H. Vaidik) reversed and remanded with instructions to enter judgment in favor of plaintiffs. The Appeals Court found that plaintiffs had standing to bring the action, even if they did not have social security numbers, as possession of a social security number was not a requirement under Indiana law to obtain a drivers license. The Court also found that the BMV rule was not properly issued in accordance with the Indiana Administrative Rules and Procedures Act and was therefore void. The Court did not address plaintiffs' constitutional challenges. 832 N.E.2d 598 (Ind. App. 2005).

The Clearinghouse is not aware of what, if any, additional litigation occurred after the case returned to the trial court.

Summary Authors

Elizabeth Daligga (7/2/2012)

People


Judge(s)

Barnes, Michael P. (Indiana)

May, Melissa S. (Indiana)

Vaidik, Nancy H. (Indiana)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Falk, Kenneth J. (Indiana)

Gilchrist, Scott (Indiana)

Ramirez, Rafael (Indiana)

Shevitz, Richard (Indiana)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Carter, Stephen (Indiana)

Steiner, David L. (Indiana)

Judge(s)

Barnes, Michael P. (Indiana)

May, Melissa S. (Indiana)

Vaidik, Nancy H. (Indiana)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Falk, Kenneth J. (Indiana)

Gilchrist, Scott (Indiana)

Ramirez, Rafael (Indiana)

Shevitz, Richard (Indiana)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Carter, Stephen (Indiana)

Steiner, David L. (Indiana)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

49A02–0410–CV–823

Brief of Appellee

Villegas v. Silverman

Indiana state appellate court

May 5, 2005

May 5, 2005

Pleading / Motion / Brief

49A02–0410–CV–823

Appellants' Reply Brief

Indiana state appellate court

May 20, 2005

May 20, 2005

Pleading / Motion / Brief

49A02–0410–CV–823

Opinion [From Court of Appeals of Indiana]

Indiana state appellate court

832 N.E.2d 598

Aug. 12, 2005

Aug. 12, 2005

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

Last updated July 27, 2022, 3:01 a.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

Case Details

State / Territory: Indiana

Case Type(s):

Immigration and/or the Border

Key Dates

Filing Date: Aug. 26, 2002

Case Ongoing: No reason to think so

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Illegal aliens who were unable to receive driver licenses or identification cards or both due to identification requirements for obtaining said documents

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles, State

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

State law

Constitutional Clause(s):

Federalism (including 10th Amendment)

Availably Documents:

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Issues

General:

Public benefits (includes, e.g., in-state tuition, govt. jobs)

Immigration/Border:

Constitutional rights

Status/Classification

Undocumented immigrants - state and local regulation