University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse

Here are all the additions to the Clearinghouse collection -- cases, summaries, case studies, etc. -- over the past 90 days:


CASE ADDITIONS
October 15, 2021
Brandt v. Rutledge
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 4:21-cv-00450 (E.D. Ark.)
FA-AR-0001
In May 2021, four families of transgender minors, and their physicians, sought to enjoin an Arkansas law (the SAFE Act) that would have banned the provision of medically necessary and potentially lifesaving healthcare to transgender adolescents. The families sued in the United States District Court of the Eastern District of Arkansas, on the basis of the Fourteenth and First Amendments. On July 21, the court granted a preliminary injunction against the SAFE Act. The decision is currently on appeal.
View Case Detail (FA-AR-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 15, 2021
Hall v. Warren
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 6:21-cv-06296 (W.D.N.Y.)
PN-NY-0060
On April 5, 2021, residents of the City of Rochester filed this putative class-action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York. The plaintiffs alleged that the Rochester Police Department (RPD) used disproportionate force–both frequency and severity–against people of color and that the City of Rochester and RPD were deliberately indifferent to the widespread and decades-long racially disparate use of force by RPD officers against people of color. The plaintiffs further alleged that the defendants retaliated against them for engaging in speech and/or conduct protected by the First Amendment during the September protests in the wake of George Floyd and Daniel Prude. As of September 15, 2021, the case is pending the defendants’ answers to an amended complaint.
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0060)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 14, 2021
Holman V. Vilsack
Mountain States Legal Foundations
Date: Aug. 2, 2021
By: Mountain States Legal Foundations
As part of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 signed by President Biden, Congress created a farm loan forgiveness program for non-white farmers. Under the program the U.S. Department of Agriculture is automatically forgiving federal farm loans at 120 percent of the loan value, unless the farmer ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 14, 2021
Holman v. Vilsak
Southeastern Legal Foundation
Date: Aug. 2, 2021
By: Southeastern Legal Foundation
As part of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 signed by President Biden, Congress created a farm loan forgiveness program for non-white farmers. Under the program the U.S. Department of Agriculture is automatically forgiving federal farm loans at 120 percent of the loan value, unless the farmer ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 14, 2021
Notice of Proposed Settlement of Class Action Concerning Access to Shelter for Individuals with Disabilities in the New York City Department of Homeless Services (DHS) Shelter System
Coalition for the Homelessness
Date: Sep. 2, 2017
By: Coalition for the Homelessness
In 2015, disabled people in shelter sued DHS in a federal class action lawsuit called Butler v. City of New York 15-CV-3783 (RWS) (JLC). This is a Class Action case, which means that it was brought on behalf of a group of people. Both sides in the case want to settle it now, and have asked the ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 14, 2021
Biden Administration Denies Aid to White Farmers and Ranchers
Mountain States Legal Foundation
Date: Jun. 29, 2021
By: Mountain States Legal Foundation
White farmers and ranchers are excluded from the American Rescue Plan Act’s “Socially Disadvantaged” Farmer and Rancher Debt Relief Program solely due to their race, violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fifth Amendment. We are suing the Biden administration on behalf of our client, ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
October 14, 2021
Saleh v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:05-cv-02467 (D. Colo.)
FA-CO-0010
In 2005, an individual incarcerated at United States Penitentiary, Administrative Maximum Prison in Florence, Colorado (ADX) filed this action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. The plaintiff alleged that, immediately in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, the policy of transferring certain incarcerated Arab-Muslim men to ADX and denying them access to the Step-Down program violated his First, Fifth, and Eighth Amendment rights. The case was consolidated in 2007 with two other plaintiffs who had filed separate, similar federal lawsuits regarding their confinement at ADX. In 2008, the parties reached a stipulated settlement agreement that resolved the plaintiffs’ claims regarding violations of their right to free exercise of their religion. In 2010, the district court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment on all claims and entered judgment in favor of the defendants. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment in 2012.
View Case Detail (FA-CO-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 14, 2021
CRIPA Investigation of the Texas Juvenile Justice Department
Case Category: Juvenile Institution
Trial Docket: N/A (No Court)
JI-TX-0005
On October 13, 2021, the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division announced that it had opened a statewide investigation into the conditions in five secure juvenile correctional facilities run by the Teas Juvenile Justice Department. The investigation was intended to determine whether Texas provided children reasonable protection from excessive use of restraints, excessive use of isolation, and physical and sexual abuse by staff and other residents. The investigation is ongoing.
View Case Detail (JI-TX-0005)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 13, 2021
Tiegs v. Vilsack
Pacific Legal Foundation
Date: Jul. 6, 2021
By: Pacific Legal Foundation
When the pandemic struck, much of the U.S. agriculture industry felt the financial crunch. Julie Owen, James Tiegs, Abraham and Cally Jergenson, and Chad Ward were initially encouraged when Congress passed a COVID-19 relief law that included a farm loan forgiveness provision for economic hardship ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 13, 2021
Colorado company sues after being disadvantaged for COVID-19 relief because of race
Pacific Legal Foundation
Date: Oct. 7, 2021
By: Pacific Legal Foundation
Today, an Alma-based event planning company filed a lawsuit to stop Colorado from using racial preferences to distribute COVID-relief funds.

Like so many other small businesses, Resort Meeting Source, an event-planning business, has suffered revenue losses stemming from the pandemic ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
October 12, 2021
One Fair Wage v. Darden Restaurants
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 3:21-cv-02695 (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0365
In 2021, One Fair Wage, an advocacy organization focused on eliminating the subminimum cash wage, filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against Darden Restaurants. The plaintiff argued the defendant's policy of paying tipped employees the lowest legally permissible cash wage and using tips to cover the difference violated of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by causing employees to experience sexual harassment and racial discrimination. On September 14, 2021, Judge Edward M. Chen dismissed the case with prejudice because the plaintiff was not an employee of Darden and so did not have standing to sue under Title VII. The plaintiff appealed to the Ninth Circuit on October 12, 2021. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (EE-CA-0365)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 12, 2021
Lee and United States of America v. Macon County School Board (N.D. Ala. Case)
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: 70-0251 (N.D. Ala.)
SD-AL-0007
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (SD-AL-0007)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 11, 2021
Santa Cruz Lesbian and Gay Community Center v. Trump
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 5:20-cv-07741-BLF (N.D. Cal.)
FA-CA-0016
In November 2020, eight plaintiffs involved in LGBTQ+ advocacy and health care, racial justice, and HIV treatment sued President Donald Trump and his administration in the Northern District of California. The plaintiffs alleged President Trump’s Executive Order banning government agencies and organizations receiving government funding from discussing unconscious racial or sexual bias in employee trainings violated their First and Fifth Amendment rights. In late December 2020, Judge Beth Labson Freeman prohibited the Trump administration from enforcing the policy on government contractors and federal grantees. The order was allowed to be enforced in government agencies and the military. After the new Biden administration took office in January 2021, the legal proceedings were temporarily suspended to allow President Biden to review existing Executive Orders. In May 2021, after the Executive Order was revoked, both parties asked the court to dismiss the case with prejudice.
View Case Detail (FA-CA-0016)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 10, 2021
Belton v. Gebhart, Bulah v. Gebhart
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: Civ. A. Nos. 258, 265 (State Court)
SD-DE-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (SD-DE-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 10, 2021
Carranza v. ICE
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-00424 (D.N.M.)
IM-NM-0002
On May 4, 2020, two individuals in ICE (US Immigration and Customs Enforcement) custody sued ICE and the Department of Homeland Security. They claimed that restrictions to telephone access by impsing costs and denying access to incoming calls during the COVID-19 pandemic when in-person visitations have been rendered impossible is unconstitutional. Specifically, they alleged that their Fifth and First Amendment rights had been violated by preventing communication with counsel, denying their right to legal representation, and other resources critical to support their cases. The magistrate judge recommended the court dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction and deny all other motions as moot; the plaintiffs filed a stipulation of dismissal on May 18, 2021.
View Case Detail (IM-NM-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 10, 2021
Katz v. Brown Harris Stevens Brooklyn
Case Category: Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Trial Docket: 1:08-cv-01698 (E.D.N.Y.)
FH-NY-0027
In 2008, a soon-to-be family filed suit against Brown Harris Stevens Brooklyn, a NYC-based real estate firm. The plaintiffs alleged that BHS consistently refused to rent or show the plaintiffs housing units because either they thought the unit was not “suitable” for children or because the landlords of the units did not want to rent to couples with children in violation of federal, state, and local housing laws. In 2009, the parties settled and the terms remain confidential.
View Case Detail (FH-NY-0027)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 9, 2021
Arriaga Reyes v. Decker
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-03600 (D.N.J.)
IM-NJ-0012
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-NJ-0012)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 9, 2021
City of San Jose v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 5:20-cv-05167 (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0168
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0168)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 7, 2021
Goodlaxson v. City of Baltimore
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 1:21-cv-01454-BPG (D. Md.)
DR-MD-0002
Three residents of Baltimore, Maryland, with mobility disabilities filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. The plaintiffs alleged that Baltimore’s sidewalks and similar pedestrian infrastructure do not give equal access to people with mobility disabilities and sought a court order requiring Baltimore to ensure its sidewalks and city infrastructure are accessible to individuals with mobility disabilities. The case is currently pending.
View Case Detail (DR-MD-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 6, 2021
AsylumWorks v. Wolf
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-03815 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0092
The plaintiffs, three non-profits and 18-noncitizen-asylum seekers, sued DHS asserting that the agency violated the APA in promulgating rules that curtailed access to Employment Authorization Documents. The plaintiffs claimed that the rules were arbitrary and capricious and contrary to the Immigration and Nationality Act. EADs serve in assisting asylum seekers to obtain government services, housing, healthcare, and work. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0092)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 6, 2021
Amaya-Cruz v. Adducci
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-00789 (N.D. Ohio)
IM-OH-0007
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-OH-0007)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 5, 2021
Arriaga Reyes, et al. v. Decker, et al.
ACLU of New Jersey
Date: Apr. 13, 2020
By: ACLU New Jersey
This case was initially filed in federal court in the Southern District of New York. After it was transferred to the District of New Jersey, on April 6, 2020, the ACLU of New Jersey, the Legal Aid Society, the Bronx Defenders, the ACLU National Prison Project and the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
October 5, 2021
D.S. v. Washington State Department of Children, Youth, and Families
Case Category: Child Welfare
Trial Docket: 2:21-cv-00113 (W.D. Wash.)
CW-WA-0002
In 2021, Disability Rights Washington, along with three children with behavioral and developmental disabilities in the care of Washington State, filed this class action complaint against the Washington State Department of Children, Youth, and Families in District Court for the Western District of Washington. The plaintiffs alleged that DCYF violated the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and Substantive Due Process rights of children with behavioral and mental disabilities in the DCYF’s care. The court granted a preliminary injunction limiting placement options for children in the state's care and laying out specific requirements for what DCYF must provide to children in its care. As of October 5, 2021, the case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (CW-WA-0002)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 3, 2021
Brown v. The Board of Education
Brown65
Date: May 8, 2019
By: Brown65
In the fall of 1950, members of the Topeka, Kansas chapter of the agreed to again challenge the “separate but equal” doctrine governing public education.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 3, 2021
Davis v. Prince Edward County
Brown65
Date: May 8, 2019
By: Brown65
In April 1951, Barbara Rose Johns, a Moton High School student in Farmville, Va., organized a two-week-long student strike to protest poor school conditions.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 3, 2021
Briggs v. Elliott
Brown65
Date: May 14, 2019
By: Brown65
In 1947 a chance encounter between Rev. James Hinton, president of the South Carolina NAACP, and Rev. J.A. DeLaine, a local school teacher, led to a push to improve access to public education for African American children living in Summerton, S.C.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 3, 2021
Belton v. Gebhart
Brown65
Date: May 14, 2019
By: Brown65
Two cases in Delaware, Belton v. Gebhart and Bulah v. Gebhart, were consolidated into Belton (Bulah) v. Gebhart when two groups of parents were frustrated with inequitable conditions in black schools.*
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
October 3, 2021
D.A.M. v. Barr
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 20-cv-1321 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0082
This lawsuit and petition for writs of habeas corpus was filed in May of 2020 amidst the coronavirus pandemic of 2020. The plaintiffs were immigrants subject to deportation, and they brought this suit against the Attorney General and Acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. They argued that their deportations during the pandemic would would likely expose them to the virus in violation of their due process rights and violate the Administrative Procedure Act. They sought injunctive and declaratory relief, as well as attorneys' fees and costs. The court refused to grant a temporary restraining order on July 23, 2020 and again on September 15, 2020. The defendants moved to dismiss on September 18. A year later, the plaintiffs filed a stipulation of dismissal and the court dismissed the action.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0082)


CASE ADDITIONS
October 3, 2021
The Women's Student Union v. U.S. Dep't of Education
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 3:21-cv-01626 (N.D. Cal.)
ED-CA-0038
The Women's Student Union, a student organization seeking to reduce the sexual harassment experienced by students at Berkeley High School, filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against the U.S. Department of Education on March 8, 2021. The Student Union asserted that the amended regulations issued in 2020 under then-Secretary Betsy DeVos fail to adequately effectuate Title IX and weakened protections for students experiencing sexual harassment. On September 9, 2021, Judge Edward M. Chen granted the defendant's motion to dismiss with leave to amend. The plaintiffs amended the complaint on October 4, 2021, and the case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (ED-CA-0038)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 2, 2021
T.R. v. Dreyfus
National Center for Youth Law
Date: Aug. 30, 2013
By: National Center for Youth Law
NCYL is co-counsel in the case of T.R. v. Dreyfus, a child welfare reform class action lawsuit against the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS). Plaintiffs seek the establishment and implementation of a system that focuses on intensive home and community-based mental ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
October 2, 2021
Wright v. Anderson
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-03704 (D.N.J.)
IM-NJ-0015
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-NJ-0015)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
October 1, 2021
Recovering Untold Stories: An Enduring Legacy of the Brown v. Board of Education Decision
Date: Jan. 1, 2018
(The Brown Foundation for Education Equity, Excellence and Research)
The book linked in this resource captures the first-person narratives of individuals who were plaintiffs or whose families were represented in the five cases consolidated by the United States Supreme Court in an opinion announced on May 17, 1954.*
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
October 1, 2021
Huisha-Huisha v. Mayorkas
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:21-cv-00100 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0096
In 2021, families of asylum- and refugee-seekers who had been detained by the Department of Homeland Security filed this class-action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Suing the federal government, the families alleged that the federal government had illegally interpreted Title 42 U.S.C. § 265 (“Title 42 Process”) to summarily expel asylum-seeking families on the pretext of COVID-19. In September 2021, the court certified the class and issued a preliminary injunction. That decision is currently on appeal. The Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit granted the government’s motion for a stay of the injunction pending appeal.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0096)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 30, 2021
AsylumWorks v. Wolf
UC Hastings College of the Law
Date: Jun. 2, 2021
By: UC Hastings College of the Law Center for Gender & Refugee Studies (UC Hastings College of the Law)
The Trump administration promulgated new rules that drastically curtail access to work authorization for people who flee to the United States and apply for asylum protection. Employment authorization documents (EADs) are integral to asylum seekers’ ability to sustain themselves and their families ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
September 30, 2021
Evenson-Childs v. Ravalli County Sheriff's Office
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 9:21-cv-00089 (D. Mont.)
CJ-MT-0004
Plaintiff, a homeless resident of the state of Montana, filed this putative class action against Ravalli County Sheriff’s Office on August 9, 2021 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana. She challenged the Office’s practice of charging pre-trial arrestees released on bail for various forms of pre-trial supervision, such as ankle monitors and breathalyzers, and of requiring pre-trial arrestees to sign a contract stating that they can be criminally charged with felony theft and criminal mischief if they do not maintain contact with their pre-trial officer or if they damage the supervision device. Plaintiff had already accrued more than $5,000 in pre-trial fees. She brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations of her Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process and equal protection rights and her Eighth Amendment right to be free of cruel and unusual punishment. She also brought state law claims alleging violation of equal protection and social condition discrimination, false imprisonment, and coercive contracts in violation of due process. Plaintiff, represented by Equal Justice Under Law and Upper Seven Law, sought declaratory and injunctive relief, damages, and attorneys’ fees and costs. U.S. District Judge Dana L. Christensen was assigned. As of September 30, 2021, the case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (CJ-MT-0004)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 30, 2021
Castañeda Juarez v. Asher
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-00700-JLR-MLP (W.D. Wash.)
IM-WA-0047
On May 8, 2020, persons detained by ICE in the state of Washington petitioned for release via habeas corpus. Plaintiffs were at-risk for severe illness or death should they contract COVID and sought to represent a class of similarly at-risk detained persons. They alleged that ICE was unable to sufficiently protect them. The court has granted class certification and issued a temporary injunction. The case is on-going.
View Case Detail (IM-WA-0047)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 30, 2021
Florida v. U.S.A.
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 8:21-cv-00541 (M.D. Fla.)
IM-FL-0030
On March 8, 2021, the State of Florida filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida seeking injunctive and declaratory relief. The state claimed that the Biden administration was attempting to shirk its non-discretionary duty to detain and remove criminal aliens under an interim policy during which they conduct a review of policies and practices surrounding immigration and deportation. The court denied the plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction precluding the federal government from implementing and enforcing interim immigration policies set forth in the memoranda from DHS and ICE. Plaintiff appealed the denied preliminary injunction on May 19, 2021. The case is stayed pending appeal.
View Case Detail (IM-FL-0030)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 29, 2021
Women's Student Union v. U.S. Department of Education
National Center for Youth Law
Date: Aug. 5, 2021
By: National Center for Youth Law
The Women’s Student Union (WSU) at Berkeley High School in Berkeley, California filed a legal challenge to Trump-era Department of Education regulations that put students nationwide in greater danger and represent a radical departure from the way previous Democratic and Republican administrations ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
September 29, 2021
Estes v. Hughes County
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-03013 (D.S.D.)
JC-SD-0002
This lawsuit, filed in 2020 in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota by the estate of a diabetic Native American man who died as a pretrial detainee in the custody of the Hughes County Jail, brought claims for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs, failure to provide adequate medical care, race discrimination, and violations of state law. The estate sought declaratory relief, damages, and attorneys' fees and costs. U.S. District Judge Karen E. Schreier was assigned. The parties have reportedly reached a settlement agreement that is pending approval from the Tribal Court. The settlement includes damages as well as an agreement from the County to revise its inmate medical care policies and procedures. As of September 29, 2021, the case is ongoing and the docket does not yet reflect the reported settlement agreement.
View Case Detail (JC-SD-0002)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 27, 2021
The Women's Student Union vs. U.S. Department of Education
https://www.publicjustice.net
Date: Sep. 26, 2021
This is a lawsuit brought under the Administrative Procedure Act to challenge key provisions of the Title IX regulations promulgated in 2020 by the U.S. Department of Education under the leadership of former Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos. The regulations limit the rights of students who ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
September 27, 2021
Bentick v. Decker
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-03679 (D.N.J.)
IM-NJ-0013
In 2020, persons detained in two New Jersey-based ICE detention facilities filed this complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; the venue was changed two days later to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. The plaintiffs alleged that the conditions of the facility they were detained in, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, violated their Fifth Amendment due process rights. The District Court judge denied the plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order, severed the case into individual actions for each plaintiff, and dismissed without prejudice the case of the first-named plaintiff. The case closed in May 2020.
View Case Detail (IM-NJ-0013)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 27, 2021
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Nexus Services, Inc.
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 5:21-cv-00016-EKD (W.D. Va.)
IM-VA-0011
In February 2021, the CFPB and several states filed suit against Nexus Services, one of their subsidiaries and company executives in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia. Nexus provides a service that connects detainees with parties that can post their immigration bond. In providing this service, Nexus allegedly exploits a detainee's unfamiliarity with the bond-posting process and the English language to create a false impression that detainees are financially indebted to Nexus. The complaint alleges that Nexus' predatory consumer practices violate the Consumer Financial Protection Act and state law. A motion to dismiss by the defendants is pending.
View Case Detail (IM-VA-0011)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 27, 2021
Center for Legal Advocacy v. Colorado Department of Corrections
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:21-cv-00792-NRN (D. Colo.)
PC-CO-0037
On March 18, 2021, the Center for Legal Advocacy, d/b/a Disability Law Colorado (“DLC”), a federal mandated protection and advocacy (“P&A”) system for the State of Colorado, filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. The plaintiff sued the Colorado Department of Corrections (“CDOC”) under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, seeking injunctive relief. DLC brought suit in its representative capacity on behalf of and to vindicate the rights of deaf and hard of hearing (DHOH) people in CDOC’s custody. The case is currently in the pleading stage.
View Case Detail (PC-CO-0037)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 27, 2021
Tassinari v. Salvation Army National Corporation
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 1:21-cv-10806 (D. Mass.)
DR-MA-0009
In this action, plaintiffs with disabilities sued the Salvation Army for violating the ADA, the Rehabilitation Act, and the Fair Housing Act. Prior to bringing the suit, plaintiffs were barred from participating in the Salvation Army's Adult Rehabilitation Centers and Programs, which provide housing and necessities to individuals with substance abuse disorders. The plaintiffs were diagnosed with Opioid Use Disorder and used doctor-prescribed medication-assisted treatment. In April 2018, Salvation Army instituted a policy barring individuals who use MAT from enrolling in ARCs. Subsequently, plaintiffs were denied access to the programs.
View Case Detail (DR-MA-0009)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 26, 2021
United States v. Nassau County Police Department
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 9:77-CV-01881 (E.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0203
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (EE-NY-0203)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 26, 2021
Malcolm v. Starr
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 0:20-cv-02503 (D. Minn.)
PC-MN-0005
In 2020, prisoners of FCI-Waseca filed this petition for a writ of habeas corpus and putative class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. The petitioners alleged that the prison's COVID-19 procedures violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, the Administrative Procedure Act, and the Rehabilitation Act. In 2021, the Court dismissed the habeas claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and found that the petitioners could not mix habeas claims with civil lawsuit claims. The case closed in March 2021.
View Case Detail (PC-MN-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 26, 2021
Prieto Refunjol v. Adducci
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-02099 (S.D. Ohio)
IM-OH-0006
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-OH-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 25, 2021
ACLU v. Montgomery County
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 2:21-cv-02316 (E.D. Pa.)
FA-PA-0018
On May 20, 2021 ACLU-PA filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against MCCF. The plaintiffs alleged that the policy of requiring proof of an existing attorney-client relationship violated plaintiff's freedom of speech, was retaliatory, and violated detained persons' right to free access to the court. On May 24, 2021, the parties agreed to a consent order ending MCCF's policy.
View Case Detail (FA-PA-0018)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 24, 2021
TN NAACP v. Lee
Equal Justice Under Law
Date: Dec. 3, 2020
By: Equal Justice Under Law
Equal Justice Under Law is suing Tennessee Governor William Lee and other state officials to restore the right to vote for more than 451,000 Tennesseans with felony records.*
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
September 24, 2021
United States v. Texas; Annunciation House v. Abbott
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:21-cv-00173 (W.D. Tex.)
IM-TX-0061
This case was filed on July 30th, 2021, by the United States to prevent the execution of an executive order from Governor Greg Abbott of Texas. The executive order prevented anyone other than law-enforcement officials from transporting multiple categories of non-citizen migrants regardless of unaccompanied minor, asylum, or refugee status. The court issued a preliminary injunction on August 26, 2021, and the case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-TX-0061)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 24, 2021
E.B. v. Landry
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 3:19-cv-00862 (M.D. La.)
CJ-LA-0018
Plaintiffs, three persons seeking to expunge various criminal records in Louisiana, filed this putative class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana on December 13, 2019, challenging Louisiana’s expungement fees. In particular, the plaintiffs challenged the $550 fee per expungement “event”—that is, per record per date per jurisdiction—as wealth-based discrimination in violation of fundamental fairness, procedural due process, and equal protection. They brought the action on behalf of themselves and “All Louisianans who have or will have criminal record events that qualify for expungement and who cannot afford the costs and fees Defendants require for those expungements.” They also sought to represent a subclass of "all Louisianans who have or will have non-conviction criminal record events but who cannot obtain a statutory fee waiver to expunge those events because of a prior conviction." They sought to bring the lawsuit against defendant classes of all clerks of court and district attorneys in the state, and requested declaratory and injunctive relief. The plaintiffs amended their complaint after the initial complaint was dismissed without prejudice for lack of standing. The action is ongoing.
View Case Detail (CJ-LA-0018)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 24, 2021
Barfield v. Cook
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-01198 (D. Conn.)
PC-CT-0024
Plaintiffs, persons in the custody of the Connecticut Department of Correction suffering from the Hepatitis C Virus (HCV), filed this putative class action lawsuit against the Department on July 19, 2018 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut. U.S. District Judge Michael P. Shea was assigned. Plaintiffs sought to represent a class of all people who are or will be prisoners in the custody of the Connecticut Department of Corrections, and who have or will have Hepatitis C while in custody and have not yet been cured. They alleged deliberate indifference to serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment, as well as violations of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, citing the Department’s prioritization of direct-acting antiviral treatment for those with the most advanced HCV only, which, they argued, resulted in delayed, less effective treatment and failed to comply with accepted standards of care. They further noted that the policy failed to address liver transplantation, the only cure for people with decompensated cirrhosis, or to include liver cancer screening. They requested declaratory and injunctive relief, compensatory and punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees and costs. On August 6, 2019, the district court certified the class and granted in part and denied in part the Department's motion to dismiss, permitting Eighth Amendment claims for injunctive relief to proceed. The parties ultimately reached a settlement agreement that would have required the department to comply with clinical guidelines, offer universal screening for HCV to all inmates, rely on infectious disease experts to make treatment recommendations or provide treatment directly, offer treatment despite risk behavior, and use directly observed therapy to monitor compliance. It would additionally have permitted class members to, at any time, request direct-acting antiviral treatment, which would trigger evaluation for the treatment. After a fairness hearing, on May 17, 2021, however, the court denied the motion to approve the settlement agreement without prejudice, citing a release of related claims accrued “from the beginning of the world to April 1, 2020” as too broad to be fair, adequate, or reasonable. Although the case has been administratively closed, settlement negotiations appear to be ongoing.
View Case Detail (PC-CT-0024)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 24, 2021
Mackes v. Colorado Department of Corrections
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:21-cv-01100 (D. Colo.)
PC-CO-0038
This lawsuit was filed on April 21, 2021 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado by two blind men in the custody of the Colorado Department of Corrections (CDOC) as well as the National Federation of the Blind of Colorado, on behalf of the two men as well as other members who are or may be in the custody of CDOC. They alleged that CDOC violated their rights under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act by excluding them from benefits, services, programs, and activities, subjecting them to discrimination, and failing to make required reasonable modifications to policies, practices, and procedures to avoid such discrimination on the basis of disability. They sought declaratory and injunctive relief as well as compensatory damages and attorneys' fees. The case is ongoing, with a motion to consolidate the case with Montoya v. Colorado Department of Corrections, No. 20-cv-03345 (D. Colo.) pending as of September 24, 2021.
View Case Detail (PC-CO-0038)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 24, 2021
NetChoice v. Moody
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 4:21-cv-00220-RH-MAF (N.D. Fla.)
FA-FL-0008
In 2021, social media organizations sought an injunction on a new state law that would limit their ability to regulate posts by candidates for political office. On May 30, 2021, the Northern District of Florida granted a preliminary injunction on the basis of violations to the First Amendment and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. On July 12, 2021, Florida state officials appealed the preliminary injunction decision to the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
View Case Detail (FA-FL-0008)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 23, 2021
E.B. et al v. Louisiana Attorney General
Equal Justice Under Law
Date: Dec. 13, 2019
By: Equal Justice Under Law
Equal Justice Under Law filed a class-action lawsuit against Louisiana’s Attorney General and state and local court officials to help 300,000+ Louisianans who are prevented from rebuilding their lives due to inability to pay expungement fees.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 23, 2021
Cynthia and Terry Easley v. Hot Spring County
Equal Justice Under Law
Date: Sep. 2, 2021
By: Equal Justice Under Law
Arkansas is the only state that criminalizes failure to pay rent. Our lawsuit aims to end this draconian law (known as the failure to vacate statute, or Ark. Code §18-16-101), claiming the scales of justice are tipped too far in favor of landlords looking for a cheap workaround from tenant ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
September 22, 2021
Hecker v. Krepp
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:21-cv-00839 (D.D.C.)
FA-DC-0025
In March 2021, a private citizen in Washington, D.C. sued a public official after the public official blocked him on Twitter. Noting that the Twitter account was primarily used as an avenue for the public official's communication with constituents, the plaintiff claimed that that defendant’s tweets created a public forum and that blocking him from participating in the public forum based on the content of his speech violated the First Amendment. In April 2021, the parties reached a settlement agreement, in which the public official agreed to unblock the private citizen and not block him again in the future on Twitter or any other social media platform used for official communication. Under the settlement, Washington, D.C. agreed to pay the plaintiff an agreed upon amount of damages. The case was dismissed pursuant to the settlement agreement in May 2021.
View Case Detail (FA-DC-0025)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 21, 2021
Wilson v. Ponce
https://www.aclusocal.org/en/cases/wilson-v-ponce
Date: May 16, 2020
By: American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU of Southern California)
More than 700 people, including several staff members, have tested positive for COVID-19 on Terminal Island in Los Angeles. At least nine have died.

This crisis need never to have reached such horrific proportions. Through a series of unconscionable delays, blunders, and failures to ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 21, 2021
Brown v. Precythe
MacArthur Justice Center
Date: Feb. 11, 2021
By: MacArthur Justice Center
After the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions holding mandatory life without parole sentences for youthful offenders unconstitutional, the Missouri Supreme Court denied resentencing hearings for impacted youthful offenders.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 20, 2021
Arnold Baker et al. v. Minnesota Department of Corrections
ACLU Minnesota
Date: Dec. 10, 2021
By: ACLU Minnesota
The American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota filed a class action lawsuit to force the Minnesota Department of Corrections to protect people in its custody from COVID-19. The lawsuit was filed in Ramsey County District Court against the DOC and its Commissioner Paul Schnell.*
View Link Detail  


CASE STUDIES
September 19, 2021
"Will Singer, Judicial Intervention and Juvenile Corrections Reform: A Case Study of Jerry M. v. District of Columbia"
Date: Jun. 1, 2012
By: Will Singer (Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology)
102 J. CRIM. L. & CRIMINOLOGY 901 (2012)
In January 2007, Vincent N. Schiraldi was the head of the District of
Columbia’s juvenile corrections agency.1
By that time, the agency had
struggled for decades to comply with a comprehensive consent decree
aimed at remedying constitutionally deficient conditions of ...
View Case Study Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 19, 2021
Lessons Learned from Georgia’s 2010 Olmstead Settlement: The Good, the Bad, and the Limitations of a Justice Department Olmstead Settlement
By: Talley Wells (Journal of Legal Medicine)
40 J. Legal Med. 45 (2020).
We were crushed.
It was Thursday, January 15, 2009, the day Captain Sully piloted his aircraft onto the Hudson River.1 It was five days before President George W.
Bush left office. And, it was the day the United States Justice Department
and Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue entered ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
September 19, 2021
Baker v. Minnesota Department of Corrections
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 62-cv-20-5143 (State Court)
PC-MN-0006
Thirteen individuals in the custody and control of the Minnesota Department of Corrections (MNDOC) filed this petition for a writ of mandamus in the Second Judicial District of Minnesota on October 22, 2020 on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated. The petitioners alleged that the MNDOC had failed and refused to perform its legal duty to protect the petitioners and those similarly situated from COVID-19 and asked the court to issue a peremptory writ of mandamus compelling the MNDOC to take action to protect incarcerated people from the virus. In March 2021, the court granted certified the class but denied the request for a writ of mandamus, expressing concern that the court would be directing MNDOC's exercise of discretion. The petitions immediately filed an amended petition. On September 30, 2021, the court granted the respondents' motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and entered judgment in favor of the respondents.
View Case Detail (PC-MN-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 19, 2021
Terkel v. CDC
Case Category: Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority
Trial Docket: 6:20-cv-00564-JC (E.D. Tex.)
PR-TX-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PR-TX-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 19, 2021
Alabama Association of Realtors v. U.S. Dep't of Health and Human Services
Case Category: Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-03377 (D.D.C.)
PR-DC-0019
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PR-DC-0019)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 18, 2021
Hill v. County of Montgomery
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 9:14-cv-00933 (N.D.N.Y.)
JC-NY-0070
In 2014, a former pre-trial detainee at the Montgomery County Jail filed this class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York. The plaintiff alleged the facility failed to provide adequate food and nutrition, in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. In 2018, the class was certified. The class was divided into two subclasses of pre-trial and post-trial detainees and was generally defined as all detainees who have been or will be placed into the custody of the jail and were detained for at least two consecutive weeks since July 24, 2011. The parties reached a settlement agreement creating a $1,000,000 settlement fund on July 22, 2020, which was approved by the court in June of 2021.
View Case Detail (JC-NY-0070)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 16, 2021
Harold v. Richards
Equal Justice Under Law
Date: Jan. 10, 2018
By: Equal Justice Under Law
Pennsylvania targeted people with drug-related convictions in a particularly severe way — unlike for all other criminal offenses, the state automatically suspended the driver’s license of any person whose conviction involved drugs. These suspensions made social reentry nearly impossible; they ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 16, 2021
DiFrancesco v. Bullock
Equal Justice Under Law
Date: Aug. 31, 2017
By: Equal Justice Under Law
Every year, Montana was suspending the licenses of an estimated 10,000 drivers because they were unable to pay court debts. The automatic suspensions were designed to coerce payment -- but this practice can never accomplish its intended goal. No punishment can increase the likelihood that a person ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 16, 2021
Fowler v. Johnson
Equal Justice Under Law
Date: May 4, 2017
By: Equal Justice Under Law
Equal Justice Under Law successfully settled with the state of Michigan
to ensure that, before the state suspends licenses for unpaid court
debt, individuals are given proper notice and the opportunity to show their inability to pay.

For those unable to pay, an ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 16, 2021
Watlington v. City of McCrory
Equal Justice Under Law
Date: Jan. 5, 2017
By: Equal Justice Under Law
Equal Justice Under Law is arguing defendants banish from the city those who are too poor to live in homes worth $7 ,500 or more.

In September of 2016, the City of McCrory Arkansas passed a Trailer-Banishment Ordinance, forbidding anyone within the city limits from residing in a mobile ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 16, 2021
Onosamba-Ohindo v. Barr
Equal Justice Under Law
Date: Mar. 11, 2020
By: Equal Justice Under Law
This critical lawsuit aims to relieve hundreds of people currently detained unjustly pending immigration proceedings. The class action lawsuit includes immigrants detained in Richwood, Louisiana with Department of Justice immigration proceedings in Batavia, New York. Individuals who are not being ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 16, 2021
Buffin v. San Francisco
Equal Justice Under Law
Date: Mar. 4, 2019
By: Equal Justice Under Law
The City and County of San Francisco kept some of its poorest residents in jail because of their inability to make a monetary payment. In San Francisco, the poorer you are, the worse the system treats you. A wealthy individual could simply purchase his or her freedom whereas someone without means ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 15, 2021
Rodriguez v. Providence Community Corrections
Equal Justice Under Law
Date: Oct. 1, 2015
By: Equal Justice Under Law
In 2015, Equal Justice Under Law went on a six-month investigation — initially led with a team of Harvard Law School Students on Spring Break — and exposed rampant corruption, racketeering, and constitutional violations pervading the Rutherford County probation system.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 15, 2021
Evenson-Childs v. Ravalli County Sheriff’s Office
Equal Justice Under Law
Date: Aug. 9, 2021
By: Equal Justice Under Law
On August 9, 2021, Equal Justice Under Law filed a lawsuit against the Ravalli County Sheriff’s Office on behalf of hundreds of individuals being extorted money through pre-trial fees before ever being found guilty of a crime.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 15, 2021
EPIC v. U.S. Postal Service
EPIC
Date: Aug. 12, 2021
By: EPIC
EPIC v. U.S. Postal Service, No. 21-2156 (D.D.C. filed August 12, 2021) is a lawsuit under the E-Government Act of 2002 to stop the U.S. Postal Service's law enforcement arm from using facial recognition and social media monitoring tools.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 15, 2021
Postawko v. Missouri Department of Corrections
MacArthur Justice Center
Date: Oct. 28, 2020
By: MacArthur Justice Center
The MacArthur Justice Center and the ACLU of Missouri jointly filed a federal class-action lawsuit challenging the Missouri Department of Corrections (MDOC) systematic denial of potential life-saving medication to inmates with chronic Hepatitis C (HCV).*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 15, 2021
Postawko v. Missouri Department of Corrections
ACLU Missouri
Date: Dec. 6, 2018
By: ACLU Missouri
The ACLU of Missouri and the Roderick and Solange MacArthur Justice Center (MJC) at St. Louis jointly filed a federal class-action lawsuit on behalf of Missourians who are asking for their constitutional and statutory rights to life-saving treatment while in prison.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 15, 2021
Review of the Use of Monitors in Civil Settlement Agreements and Consent Decrees Involving State and Local Government Entities
U.S. Department of Justice
Date: 9/13/2021
By: Attorney General Merrick Garland and Assoc. AG Vanita Gupta (U.S. Department of Justice)
Today, the Justice Department will begin implementing a set of principles and specific recommendations regarding the use ofmonitors in civil settlement agreements and consent decrees involving state and local governmental entities. These actions are the result of a review conducted by the Associate ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
September 15, 2021
Brnovich v. Biden
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:21-cv-01568 (D. Ariz.)
IM-AZ-0032
The Attorney General for the State of Arizona filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona alleging that the Biden administration's planned vaccine mandate was unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because it applied to U.S. citizens but not unauthorized aliens.
View Case Detail (IM-AZ-0032)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 15, 2021
DOJ Investigation of Georgia Prisons
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: N/A (No Court)
PC-GA-0026
The Justice Department opened a statewide civil investigation into conditions of confinement of prisoners held in Georgia’s prisons. The DOJ investigation was conducted under the authority granted by CRIPA. The investigation examined whether Georgia provided its incarcerated population with ...
View Case Detail (PC-GA-0026)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 13, 2021
Cruz-Guzman v. Minnesota
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: 27-CV-15-19117 (State Court)
SD-MN-0002
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (SD-MN-0002)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 12, 2021
City of Baltimore Consent Decree
Date: Apr. 7, 2017
(City of Baltimore)
On April 7, 2017, the City of Baltimore and the Department of Justice (DOJ) entered into a Consent Decree, which is a court enforceable agreement to resolve DOJ's findings that it believed the Baltimore City Police Department (BPD) had engaged in a pattern and practice of conduct that violates the ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 12, 2021
Arctic Village Council v. Meyer
ACLU Alaska
Date: Oct. 13, 2020
By: ACLU Alaska
The lawsuit, Arctic Village Council v. Meyer, seeks to waive a provision of state law for the November general election that requires voters who submit a mail-in absentee ballot to have a witness sign their ballot return envelope even in the midst of a highly contagious and deadly pandemic. *
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 12, 2021
Alaska Ballot Witness Law (Arctic Village Council et al. v Meyer et al.)
Native American Rights Fund
Date: Oct. 13, 2020
By: Native American Rights Fund
Alaska’s witness signature requirement for casting an absentee ballot is unconstitutional, and immediate injunctive and declaratory relief must be granted, a lawsuit filed on September 8, 2020 against Lieutenant Governor Kevin Meyer, Director of the Alaska Division of Elections Gail Fenumiai, and ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
September 12, 2021
National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-02448 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0039
On November 13, 2017, several immigrant rights' organizations sued ICE under FOIA, seeking records on a mass immigration enforcement operation called "Operation Mega," planned for September 2017, or related operations. ICE finished document production in 2019, and the parties filed motions for summary judgment related to one Handbook in early 2020. The court granted the defendants' motion, and the case subsequently closed.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0039)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 11, 2021
Cowan and US v. Bolivar County Board of Education
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: 2:65-cv-00031 (N.D. Miss.)
SD-MS-0007
In 1965, the Bolivar County School District was sued to force it to desegregate, and in 1969 an order was entered by the Court. In 1985, the United States intervened to enforce the 1969 order, saying that the school district still had a racially identifiable school system. In 2011, the United States filed a motion requesting that the previous orders be enforced, and, in 2012, the Court ordered the parties to come up with a plan to eliminate racially identifiable schools and resolve problems with faculty assignment. The plan to allow open enrollment, with all students able to choose between each of two junior high and high schools (as opposed to attendance zones) was approved by the district court but reversed by the Fifth Circuit in 2014, which ordered that the district court explain how open enrollment will eliminate racially identifiable schools and why other solutions, such as consolidating the two schools, were not viable. In January of 2017, the parties eventually reached a settlement agreement consolidating buildings and schools before the 2017-2018 school year.
View Case Detail (SD-MS-0007)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 11, 2021
Money v. Jeffreys
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-02094 (N.D. Ill.)
PC-IL-0051
Prisoners of the Illinois Department of Corrections sought writs of habeas corpus, requesting the release of particularly vulnerable individuals in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. The petition for habeas corpus was denied on April 10. On July 8, a pro se intervenor filed a motion for emergency relief and on September 10, Judge Kness directed the parties to submit a concise joint status report. He also ordered the respondents to respond to the intervenor's motion by October 2. On September 25, the parties submitted a status report stating that settlement discussions were ongoing in a related case and the court stayed the case, with the exception of the outstanding intervenor's motion. The parties settled, and on May 21, 2021, the case was dismissed with prejudice.
View Case Detail (PC-IL-0051)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 11, 2021
Money v. Pritzker
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-02093 (N.D. Ill.)
PC-IL-0050
Prisoners of the Illinois Department of Corrections filed a class action lawsuit, requesting a temporary restraining order that would release particularly vulnerable individuals in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. The court found that the PLRA barred the court from granting the temporary restraining order. Later the defendants filed a motion to dismiss which was denied as moot after the plaintiffs had filed an amended complaint on May 20. The parties reached a settlement in March 2021, and the case was dismissed with prejudice on April 5, 2021.
View Case Detail (PC-IL-0050)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 10, 2021
Resolving Tensions between Constitutional Rights: Use Immunity in Concurrent or Related Proceedings
Columbia Law Review
Date: Jan. 1, 1976
By: William R. Stein (Columbia Law School Law Student)
William R. Stein, Resolving Tensions between Constitutional Rights: Use Immunity in Concurrent or Related Proceedings, 76 COLUM. L. REV. 674 (1976)
Student Note in the Columbia Law Review that discusses Avant with fair detail under the umbrella of use immunity and its relevance in criminal proceedings*
View Link Detail  


CASE STUDIES
September 10, 2021
"Resolving Tensions between Constitutional Rights: Use Immunity in Concurrent or Related Proceedings"
Columbia Law Review
Date: Jan. 1, 1976
By: William R. Stein (Columbia Law School Law Student)
William R. Stein, Resolving Tensions between Constitutional Rights: Use Immunity in Concurrent or Related Proceedings, 76 COLUM. L. REV. 674 (1976)
Student Note in the Columbia Law Review that discusses Avant with fair detail under the umbrella of use immunity and its relevance in criminal proceedings*
View Case Study Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 9, 2021
March 2017 Stop & Frisk Report
ACLU
Date: Jul. 11, 2017
By: ACLU Illinois
March 24, 2017 -- Independent consultant and former U.S. Magistrate Judge Arlander Keys released his first semiannual report pursuant to the 2015 investigatory stop and protective pat down agreement between the City of Chicago, Chicago Police Department and the ACLU of Illinois.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 9, 2021
Robinson v. Martin
MacArthur Justice Center
Date: Oct. 14, 2016
By: Locke Bowman and Alexa Van Brunt
The MacArthur Justice Center partnered with Hughes Socol Piers Resnick & Dym, Ltd. and Civil Rights Corps to file a federal class action targeting Cook County’s unconstitutional pay-for-release cash bail system, which results in the pre-trial detention of legally innocent men and women who cannot ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 9, 2021
Independent Consultant Releases New Stop & Frisk Report for the City of Chicago
ACLU
Date: Mar. 7, 2018
By: ACLU Illinois
Former U.S. Magistrate Judge Arlander Keys today released the latest report on investigatory stops and protective pat downs by Chicago Police officers. The report is the most recent evaluation of data gathered and analyzed as part of an agreement between the City of Chicago, Chicago Police ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 9, 2021
Period 3 and 4 - Stop and Frisk Report, CY2017
ACLU
Date: Oct. 17, 2019
By: ACLU Illinois
This is the third report conducted by retired Magistrate Judge Arlander Keys as a result of a 2015 agreement between the City of Chicago and the ACLU. The agreement followed an ACLU report showing that stop and frisk was used more than four times as often in Chicago as compared to New York City ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
September 9, 2021
Reed v. City of Ferguson
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 14SL-CC04195 (State Court)
CJ-MO-0014
On December 8th, 2014 a class of citizens of Missouri brought a lawsuit against the City of Feguson, Missouri. The class of citizens were those assessed warrant recall fees by the city. The plaintiffs were represented by ArchCity Defenders. The plaintiffs are seeking various types of relief including injunctive relief, compensatory damages and attorneys' fees. The case settled in May 2020.
View Case Detail (CJ-MO-0014)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 8, 2021
"You're Destroying Families"
ProPublica Illinois
Date: Jun. 20, 2019
By: Melissa Sanchez and Duaa Eldeib
When his son was born in 2014, Jorge Matias held the infant in the hospital and sang him the lullabies he had learned as a child in Guatemala. He teased the boy’s mother that he would raise their son to speak Spanish, and one day the two of them would talk in secret around her.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 8, 2021
2015 Stop and Frisk Report
ACLU Illinois
Date: Mar. 20, 2015
By: ACLU Illinois
Chicago has failed to train, supervise and monitor law enforcement in minority communities for decades, resulting in a failure to ensure that officers’ use of stop and frisk is lawful. This report contains troubling signs that the Chicago Police Department has a current practice of unlawfully ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 7, 2021
“The Judge Didn't Sentence Me to Be Raped”: Tracy Neal v. Michigan Department of Corrections: A 15-Year Battle Against the Sexual Abuse of Women Inmates in Michigan
Women & Criminal Justice
Date: Jul. 9, 2012
By: Rachel Culley
This research traces the history of Tracy Neal v. Michigan Department of Corrections, a class action lawsuit against the Michigan Department of Corrections that alleged the sexual abuse of women prisoners spanning more than two decades. The litigation resulted in combined jury verdicts of more than ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 7, 2021
New Jersey Settles NAACP Lawsuit
State Police New Jersey
Date: Mar. 1, 2000
By: New Jersey Department of Law & Public Safety
New Jersey and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and a class of unhired trooper applicants have settled a four-year-old lawsuit against the State Police by agreeing to a plan to emphasize both stringent educational standards and the need for diversity in the ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 7, 2021
Davis v. Jeffreys
Uptown People's Law Center
Date: 2021
By: Uptown People's Law Center
In June 2016, UPLC brought a case against the Illinois Department of Corrections on behalf of six prisoners who were facing or had faced, extreme isolation in Illinois prisons. These individuals had been held in extreme isolation for between 6 months and 17 years. The conditions described by the ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
September 6, 2021
Arctic Village Council v. Meyer
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 3AN-20-07858Cl (State Court)
VR-AK-0013
The Arctic Village Council, the League of Women Voters, and individual Alaskan voters filed this lawsuit in the Superior Court for the State of Alaska challenging Alaska's witness requirement for absentee ballots in the 2020 General Election. The plaintiffs argued that the requirement imposed an unconstitutional burden during the Covid-19 pandemic by forcing high-risk voters to either risk their health or forgo their right to vote. The court agreed and issued a preliminary injunction eliminating the witness requirement for the November 2020 election.
View Case Detail (VR-AK-0013)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 6, 2021
Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg County Board of Education
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: 3:65-cv-01974 (W.D.N.C.)
SD-NC-0001
On January 1, 1965, parents on behalf of their minor children filed suit in the Western District of North Carolina at Charlotte, asking for an injunction barring discriminatory school selection practices. The injunction was granted and a bussing plan for desegregation was implemented. The case was reopened in 1999, but the court held that the schools had reached unitary status and thus dissolved the 30-year desegregation order.
View Case Detail (SD-NC-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 6, 2021
Arizona Democratic Party v. Hobbs
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-01143 (D. Ariz.)
VR-AZ-0057
In June 2020, the Arizona Democratic Party, the Democratic National Committee, and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. The plaintiffs alleged that the state's policy requiring unsigned mail-in ballots to be corrected by election day violated the First Amendment, the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. On September 10, the district court granted the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary and permanent injunction requiring Arizona to give voters five business days to correct unsigned ballots and the defendants appealed. The Ninth Circuit stayed the injunction pending the appeal. There has been no further action as of September 2021.
View Case Detail (VR-AZ-0057)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 5, 2021
Kennedy v. City of Zanesville
Relman Colfax PLLC
Date: 2008
By: Relman Colfax
On July 10, 2008, a federal court jury returned verdicts totaling nearly $11 million against the City of Zanesville, Ohio, Muskingum County, Ohio, and the East Muskingum Water Authority for illegally denying water service to a predominately African-American community on the basis of race. The sixty- ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
September 5, 2021
Seth v. McDonough
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 8:20-cv-01028 (D. Md.)
JC-MD-0017
In April 2020, pretrial and post-conviction detainees at Prince George's County Jail filed this class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The plaintiffs alleged that in light of COVID-19, they were being held in conditions that violated their Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment Rights. A subclass of pretrial, medically vulnerable plaintiffs also alleged that they are being held in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. On May 21, the court granted in part the plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order. Defendant appealed and were denied a stay pending their appeal. On July 7, the plaintiffs submitted an amended complaint, pointing to the lack of mental health services during an indefinite lockdown. The parties filed a joint motion to stay proceedings on August 27 pending settlement talks. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (JC-MD-0017)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 5, 2021
Busby v. Bonner
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-02359 (W.D. Tenn.)
JC-TN-0012
Two detainees in Shelby County Jail in Tennessee filed this petition for a writ of habeas corpus. They claimed that failure to take sufficient COVID-19 precautions violated the Fourteenth Amendment, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and they sought release. The court appointed an "Independent Inspector" to assess conditions at the jail and, based on his report, denied preliminary relief. The court also denied defendants' motion to dismiss, and a trial is scheduled for May 2021. An Independent Inspector was tasked with inspecting the jail to evaluate the conditions. While praising defendants' professionalism, he wrote that several adjustments needed to be made in order for the jail to be a safe place for detainees. After attending mediation and filing a joint motion for preliminary approval of class action settlement, the court preliminarily granted the consent decree requiring monthly reports on the status of COVID-19 in the Jail and unannounced, periodic inspections by the Inspector. A final approval hearing is scheduled for March 5, 2021.
View Case Detail (JC-TN-0012)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 5, 2021
In re Edward Allen Britton
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 07CRWR678445 (State Court)
PC-CA-0043
This case involved an inmate's petition for a writ of habeas corpus. While the plaintiff's writ was denied, the court did order the defendant jail to provide all inmates with a copy of their administrative appeals.
View Case Detail (PC-CA-0043)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 4, 2021
Cantwell v. Crawford
Case Category: Indigent Defense
Trial Docket: 09EV275M (State Court)
PD-GA-0006
The plaintiffs were a class of pretrial detainees in various counties in northern Georgia who did not have counsel because their "conflict" counsel had withdrawn or ceased representation when their contracts with the Northern Circuit Public Defender were terminated. The plaintiffs sued because they were left in jail without counsel for months. The case settled, setting new standards for providing contracted counsel in conflict cases in the countries covered by the Northern Circuit.
View Case Detail (PD-GA-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 4, 2021
North Carolina Department of Correction v. North Carolina Medical Board
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 07CV003574 (State Court)
CJ-NC-0002
On January 18, 2007, the North Carolina Medical Board (NCMB) issued a Position Statement to express their views regarding the participation of North Carolina's licensed physicians in executions. NCMB stated their belief that any physician participation in capital punishment was a violation of ...
View Case Detail (CJ-NC-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 4, 2021
Neal v. Michigan Department of Corrections
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 96-6986-CZ (State Court)
PC-MI-0021
In 1996, six female inmates filed a class action lawsuit against the Michigan Department of Corrections alleging a pattern of systematic sexual misconduct, sexual harassment and abuse. After losing jury verdicts totaling $30 million at two different trials, defendants settled in July 2009 for $100 million and substantial injunctive relief.
View Case Detail (PC-MI-0021)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 4, 2021
Flores v. City of Baldwin Park Police Department
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: BC560031 (State Court)
IM-CA-0078
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0078)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 4, 2021
Gomez-Garcia v. New York City Police Dep't
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 451000-2012 (State Court)
PN-NY-0015
This case is about arrests for marijuana possession in New York City. On June 22, 2012, a group of individuals who had been arrested for possession of marijuana filed this lawsuit in the New York Supreme Court for the County of New York against New York City and the NYPD under state law. The plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief, claiming that the NYPD had violated state law, which mandated that police issue a ticket rather than arrest individuals for possession of marijuana.
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0015)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 4, 2021
Gloucester County (New Jersey Turnpike) Police Stop Cases
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: MER-L-002687-96 (State Court)
PN-NJ-0001
The NAACP and several individuals filed a class action lawsuit in New Jersey state court against the New Jersey State Police alleging discriminatory recruitment, application, and hiring practices in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq.) and state law. The main discriminatory practices were a requirement of a college education and an examination (Law Enforcement Candidate Record), which allegedly had a disparate impact on Black and Latino candidates. After an appeal of decisions on pro hac vice appearance, the parties settled and the court entered the agreement as a consent decree. The decree required a reform of employment practices, including selection of a less discriminatory examination and alternate education requirements.
View Case Detail (PN-NJ-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 4, 2021
Hixson v. Hope
Case Category: Juvenile Institution
Trial Docket: CV 029154 (State Court)
JI-CA-0014
Parents brought this suit on behalf of their juvenile son, who was incarcerated at the San Joaquin Juvenile Hall. Alleging a wide range of inadequate and abusive conditions, the plaintiffs entered into a consent decree with the defendant, whereby the latter agreed to improvements in training, conditions, and procedures. The consent decree appeared to have lasted almost four years, but the precise duration is unknown to the Clearinghouse.
View Case Detail (JI-CA-0014)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 3, 2021
ACLU Settlement with the Chicago Police Department
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: N/A (No Court)
PN-IL-0016
On August 7, 2015, the Chicago Police Department, the City of Chicago, and the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois (ACLU) reached a settlement agreement to conduct independent evaluation of the Chicago Police Department's stop and frisk practices and increase public disclosure regarding the investigatory stops.
View Case Detail (PN-IL-0016)


CASE ADDITIONS
September 3, 2021
Trader Joe’s Point of Sale Agreement and Amendment
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: N/A (No Court)
DR-CA-0044
Three organizations representing the interests of the visually impaired entered negotiations with Trader Joe's to ensure such individuals did not have to divulge sensitive PIN numbers due to unusable keypads. Trader Joe's agreed to a roll out in stages of new tactile keypads in its stores, completing the rollout by August 2009.
View Case Detail (DR-CA-0044)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 1, 2021
Terrill v. State of Oregon
Disability Rights Advocates
Date: Apr. 20, 2021
By: Disability Rights Advocates
On April 20, 2021, Disability Rights Advocates and Lynn S. Walsh filed a class-action lawsuit against the State of Oregon and the Oregon Department of Corrections (ODOC) on behalf of current and former people with disabilities who are incarcerated and who have been charged for the costs of the ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
September 1, 2021
Florida Parents Partner with IJ to Shut Down Dystopian "Predictive Policing" Program
Institute for Justice
Date: Aug. 4, 2021
By: Institute for Justice
The Sheriff’s Office of Pasco County, Florida, harasses people in their own homes using a method they call “predictive policing.” The program has unfolded like a dystopian nightmare for the Pasco County residents it has ensnared, who have been subjected to near-constant police surveillance ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 31, 2021
Messina v. City of Fort Lauderdale
Florida Justice Institute
Date: Jul. 2, 2021
By: Florida Justice Institute
The Florida Justice Institute (FJI), in partnership with Fort Lauderdale lawyers Mara Shlackman and Frantz J. McLawrence, filed a lawsuit challenging a pair of the City of Fort Lauderdale’s anti-panhandling ordinances as an unconstitutional restriction of free speech. One ordinance prohibits ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 31, 2021
Avendaño v. Asher
ACLU Washington
Date: Dec. 11, 2020
By: ACLU Washington
The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Washington, and the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project (NWIRP) sued U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement today on behalf of immigrants detained at the Tacoma Northwest Detention Center in Tacoma, Washington. The legal organizations seek the ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 30, 2021
ACLU Files Federal Lawsuit Challenging Texas Migrant Transportation Order
American Civil Liberties Union
Date: Aug. 5, 2021
By: ACLU
The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Texas are suing Texas Gov. Greg Abbott over his executive order that bars the transportation of certain migrants in the state.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 30, 2021
Publisher Again Challenges Censorship of Publications by Florida DOC
Human Rights Defense Center
Date: Aug. 10, 2021
By: Human Rights Defense Center
The Human Rights Defense Center (HRDC) has filed suit in the United States Southern District of Florida to challenge censorship by the Florida Department of Corrections (FDOC) and Secretary Mark S. Inch, as well as Jose Colon, warden of the Everglades Correctional Institution. The lawsuit alleges ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 30, 2021
New York Immigration Coalition v. U.S. Department of Commerce
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-05025 (S.D.N.Y.)
PB-NY-0033
In March 2018, the Secretary of Commerce ordered that the 2020 Census include a question about citizenship of all U.S. residents. The following June, a group of six advocacy and policy organizations filed a complaint against the Department of Commerce and Bureau of Census alleging that the question intentionally discriminated immigrant communities of color. The plaintiffs posited that the Trump Administration sought to deter participation in the Census and affect federal funding. This case was informally coordinated with States v. U.S. Department of Commerce. The district court ultimately found a litany of Administrative Procedure Act violations and vacated the decision to add the citizenship question. The Government appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, which upheld the legality of the citizenship question but remanded back to the district court due to the pretextual nature of the Commerce Department’s explanation. Judge Furman permanently enjoined the government from adding the question to the census and the census forms were printed without them. The case is now closed.
View Case Detail (PB-NY-0033)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 29, 2021
Johnson v. Guzman Chavez
Oyez
Date: Jun. 29, 2021
By: Oyez
Respondents are a class of noncitizens subject to reinstated removal orders, which generally are not open to challenge. However, if a noncitizen has a reasonable fear of persecution or torture in the countries designated in their removal orders, the person may pursue withholding of removal. That is ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 29, 2021
G: The Miseducation of Larry P
WNYCStudios
Date: Jun. 7, 2019
By: Radiolab
Are some ideas so dangerous we shouldn’t even talk about them? That question brought Radiolab’s senior editor, Pat Walters, to a subject that at first he thought was long gone: the measuring of human intelligence with IQ tests. Turns out, the tests are all around us. In the workplace. The ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 29, 2021
Biden v. Texas
SCOTUSBlog
Date: Aug. 24, 2021
By: SCOTUSBlog
Issue: Whether the Supreme Court should issue a stay of a district court’s injunction requiring the federal government to reinstate the Migrant Protection Protocols.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 29, 2021
The Story of Sale v. Haitian Centers Council: Guantanamo and Refoulement
Columbia University
Date: 1993
By: Harold Hongju Koh & Michael J. Wishnie
Nearly two decades before September 11, 2001, thousands of foriegn nationals without due process at the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.*
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 28, 2021
Woodcock v. Correct Care Solutions
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 3:16-cv-00096 (E.D. Ky.)
PC-KY-0010
Plaintiffs—a class of approximately 1,200 prisoners in the custody of the Kentucky Department of Corrections diagnosed with Hepatitis C, and those who might be diagnosed in the future—sued the Department in an action removed to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky on December 7, 2016. They challenged the Department’s treatment of inmates with Hepatitis C, in particular the practice of triaging direct-acting antiviral treatment based on a priority level categorization of infected inmates, bringing claims for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments and failure to reasonably accommodate their Hepatitis C in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act of 1978. They also alleged negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress in violation of state law. They sought declaratory and injunctive relief and punitive damages. Judge Gregory F. Van Totenhove certified the class but denied a permanent injunction on July 12, 2019, 2019 WL 3068447, before ultimately granting the Department’s motion for summary judgment on February 2, 2020, holding that the plaintiffs failed to show that the Department’s practice of screening and monitoring inmates with Hepatitis C and prioritizing direct-acting antiviral treatment was inadequate or detrimental to their health, or that the defendants had acted with deliberate indifference to substantial risk of harm—and remanded the action to state court as to the state law claims, 2020 WL 556391. On July 6, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed the grant of summary judgment. 2021 WL 2799978.
View Case Detail (PC-KY-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 27, 2021
Doe v. Washington State Department of Corrections
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 4:21-cv-05059-TOR (E.D. Wash.)
PC-WA-0034
Disability Rights Washington and the ACLU of Washington, in collaboration with private counsel, filed this action in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington on April 7, 2021. They sought to prevent the Washington State Department of Corrections from releasing records, requested through Washington’s Public Records Act, that would reveal the identities and personal information of the class of people that they aimed to represent: transgender, non-binary, gender non-conforming, and intersex persons currently and formerly in Department of Corrections custody. They argued that disclosure of the requested records would violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments as well as state law, and sought declaratory and injunctive relief. Judge Thomas O. Rice granted an initial temporary restraining order on April 8, 2021, 2021 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 68698, and a preliminary injunction on May 17, 2021, 2021 WL 2453099, finding that disclosure would cause irreparable injury, and that the plaintiffs’ interest in personal and public safety outweighed the Department of Corrections’ interests in disclosure. The Court also preliminarily certified the class on May 17, 2021. 2021 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 93489.
View Case Detail (PC-WA-0034)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 26, 2021
Does v. Washington State Department of Corrections
By: Disability Rights Washington
Does v. Washington State Department of Corrections, et al., E.D. Wash. No. 4:21-cv-05059-TOR, is a federal class-action lawsuit challenging the way the Washington Department of Corrections (DOC) responds to Public Records Act requests for information about people in custody DOC has identified as ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 26, 2021
Disability Rights Connecticut v. Connecticut Department of Correction
https://www.acluct.org/en/cases/disability-rights-connecticut-v-department-correction
By: ACLU of Connecticut
Disability Rights Connecticut (DRCT), represented by the ACLU of Connecticut, Yale Law School’s Lowenstein International Human Rights Law Clinic, and Morrison & Foerster, sued the Connecticut Department of Correction (DOC) for its continuing physical and psychological abuse of people with mental ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 26, 2021
Texas & Missouri v. United States
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:21-cv-00067 (N.D. Tex.)
IM-TX-0059
This is a case about the Biden Administration's termination of the Trump-era "Remain in Mexico" policy, Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), which required individuals at the U.S.-Mexico border to wait in Mexico pending adjudication of their immigration claims. On April 13, 2021, the states of Texas and Missouri filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas against President Biden, DHS, CBP, ICE, and USCIS under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as attorneys' fees. They claimed that the suspension of MPP was "arbitrary and capricious" under the APA and caused the government to violate the INA. The district court ordered a permanent injunction requiring the federal government to implement and enforce MPP, and the federal government appealed to the Fifth Circuit. The government also moved for a stay, which was denied by the district court, Fifth Circuit, and Supreme Court. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-TX-0059)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 25, 2021
Disability Rights Connecticut v. Connecticut Department of Correction
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 3:21-cv-00146 (D. Conn.)
PC-CT-0023
This case challenged the prolonged isolation and in-cell shackling of persons with mental illness in the custody of the Connecticut Department of Correction. Disability Rights Connecticut initiated the action in the District of Connecticut on February 4, 2021, in collaboration with the ACLU Foundation of Connecticut, the Lowenstein International Human Rights Clinic at Yale Law School, and Morrison and Foerster LLP. They alleged cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments as well as violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and requested declaratory and injunctive relief, seeking to end the practices of prolonged isolation and in-cell shackling and to ensure meaningful access to services, programs, and activities for incarcerated persons with mental illness. As of August 24, 2021, settlement discussions were ongoing.
View Case Detail (PC-CT-0023)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 24, 2021
Police Misconduct
State of California Department of Justice
Date: Mar. 5, 2001
By: Office of the Attorney General
In January 1999, Attorney General Lockyer issued a new policy governing the review of complaints received by the Department of Justice that allege police misconduct by local law enforcement agencies or their employees. Complaints that have exhausted the local review process will be referred to both ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 24, 2021
Attorney General Lockyer Announces Conclusion of Five-Year, Court-Enforced State Monitoring of Riverside Police Department
State of California Department of Justice
Date: Mar. 2, 2006
By: Office of the Attorney General
Attorney General Bill Lockyer today announced that the Riverside Police Department (“RPD”) has fulfilled the conditions of a court-enforced judgment reached in 2001 between the Attorney General, the City of Riverside and the RPD. This judgment required the department to implement wide-ranging ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 23, 2021
Kelley v. Hodgson
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 98-3083 (State Court)
JC-MA-0004
In 1998, inmates in the Bristol County Jail filed a class action suit on behalf of all present and future inmates challenging the overcrowded conditions at the jail. The Superior Court of Massachusetts for Suffolk County enjoined defendant from using port-a-bunks, which allowed inmates to sleep on common areas floors, and from triple-bunking any cell. Later, the plaintiffs also added a claim that the defendant was locking inmates in cells without toilets. In 2009, the court granted summary judgment for the original 1998 claims. The parties later negotiated a settlement that the court approved in 2012. As of September 2021, it appears that the settlement is still in effect and plaintiffs' counsel is monitoring the defendants' compliance.
View Case Detail (JC-MA-0004)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 23, 2021
People of the State of California v. City of Riverside
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 355410 (State Court)
PN-CA-0014
On March 5, 2001, the Attorney General of California [AG] filed a complaint and stipulated judgment in Riverside County Superior Court. This stipulated judgment resolved issues regarding racially discriminatory law enforcement uncovered by the AG during a nearly two-year investigation of the Riverside Police Department (RPD). That investigation was sparked by the 1998 shooting death of Tyisha Miller, a 19-year old black woman, who was shot by RPD officers. Pursuant to the stipulated judgment, the RPD agreed to implement a series of reforms. After five years, the AG determined that RPD had fulfilled its obligations, and the stipulated judgment was dissolved.
View Case Detail (PN-CA-0014)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 22, 2021
Texas v. United States
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 6:21-cv-00016 (S.D. Tex.)
IM-TX-0058
On April 6, 2021, the states of Texas and Louisiana filed this lawsuit in the Southern District of Texas. The plaintiffs sued the DHS, CBP, ICE, and USCIS under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The plaintiffs claimed the Biden Administration released guidance in two memoranda that unlawfully limited holding criminal aliens convicted of felony offenses in ICE custody. On August 19, 2021, the court granted a preliminary injunction, enjoining specific sections of the federal government's memoranda. The federal government appealed to the Fifth Circuit. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-TX-0058)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 12, 2021
El Ali v. Barr (Jardaneh v. Barr)
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 8:18-cv-02415-PX (D. Md.)
NS-MD-0002
Numerous Muslims filed suit against multiple federal agencies in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland on August 8, 2018. All plaintiffs, most of whom were American citizens, had been placed on a federal terrorist watchlist. They alleged violations of the First, Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments as well as the Administrative Procedure Act and Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The court granted defendants' motion to dismiss in part on July 20, 2020. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (NS-MD-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 12, 2021
City of Seattle v. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:19-cv-07151 (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0151
On October 29, 2019, the City of Seattle and a group of non-profit organizations filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, challenging the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services's (USCIS) new fee waiver policies which made it substantially more difficult for naturalization applicants to obtain waivers. The plaintiffs alleged violations of the Administrative Procedure Act and federal law. On December 11, 2019, the Court issued a nationwide preliminary injunction enjoining the policies. On February 10, 2020, the Court ordered the case be held in abeyance pending proposed rulemaking changes by USCIS. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0151)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 12, 2021
Afghan and Iraqi Allies v. Pompeo
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-01388-TSC (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0051
Iraqis and Afghans who worked for the U.S. government in their home countries filed suit against the Departments of State and Homeland Security in 2018. They had experienced long delays in the processing of their applications for special immigrant visas (SIV). They alleged this violated a 2013 congressional mandate that SIV applications must be processed fully within nine months. In September 2019, the court granted declaratory and injunctive relief, stating that the defendants’ delays were unreasonable. In February 2020, the district court certified the plaintiffs' proposed classes for those similarly situated to them. The parties submitted a joint proposed adjudication plan that the court approved in June 2020. Defendants filed an interlocutory appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on August 12, 2020. This challenged numerous orders issued by the district court including the court-approved joint adjudication plan and class certification. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0051)


CASE STUDIES
August 11, 2021
"Why Alabama School Desegregation Succeeded (And Failed) "
Case W. Rsrv. L. Rev.
Date: 2017
By: Wendy Parker (Wake Forest University School of Law Faculty)
67 Case W. Rsrv. L. Rev. 1091 (2017)
Alabama is not an obvious location for successful school desegregation. The state is not generally known for being at the forefront of creating racial equality, particularly when the suit started in 1963. More likely to come to mind is Governor George Wallace standing in the schoolhouse door to ...
View Case Study Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 11, 2021
Libertarian Party of Illinois v. Pritzker
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-02112 (N.D. Ill.)
VR-IL-0133
The Libertarian Party of Illinois, the Green Party of Illinois, and several independent candidates filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on April 2, 2020. Plaintiffs challenged signature gathering requirements for ballot qualification during the COVID-19 lockdowns. The court granted a preliminary injunction on April 23, 2020, which allowed the collection of electronic signatures, extended the filing deadline, and permitted candidates who qualified for previous ballots to qualify for that year’s ballot. The Seventh Circuit upheld the preliminary injunction on August 20, 2020. After the November 2020 elections passed, the parties filed a joint stipulation of dismissal, which the Court granted on July 8, 2021.
View Case Detail (VR-IL-0133)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 11, 2021
Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation v. Mnuchin
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-01002-APM (D.D.C.)
PB-DC-0016
Various Native American tribes filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on April 17, 2020. They argued that Alaska Native Corporations (ANC) were not tribal governments as defined by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act). Thus, ANCs should not receive CARES Act funding which had been set aside for tribal governments. On June 26, 2020, the district court held that ANCs were tribal governments and thus entitled to CARES Act relief. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed this order on September 25, 2020. However, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6-3 vote, reversed and remanded the case on June 25, 2021. The court reasoned that ANCs were practically tribal governments under the plain definition of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, even though they were not considered tribal governments in an official political sense, and thus were entitled to CARES Act relief. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PB-DC-0016)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 10, 2021
Faust v. Vilsack
Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty
Date: Apr. 29, 2021
(Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty)
This is a webpage created by plaintiff's counsel from Faust v. Vilsack (PB-WI-0006). It provides additional information on plaintiff and an overview of the case itself.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 10, 2021
McKinney v. Vilsack: Race-based COVID-19 farm loan forgiveness denies equal treatment to Texas farmer
Pacific Legal Foundation
Date: Jun. 10, 2021
(Pacific Legal Foundation)
This is a webpage created by plaintiff's counsel from McKinney v. Vilsack (PB-TX-0019). It provides additional information on plaintiff and an overview of the case itself.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 10, 2021
Dunlap v. Vilsack: Race-based COVID-19 farm loan forgiveness denies equal treatment to Oregon farmer
Pacific Legal Foundation
Date: Jun. 24, 2021
(Pacific Legal Foundation)
This is a webpage created by plaintiffs' counsel from Dunlap v. Vilsack (PB-OR-0007). It provides additional information on plaintiffs and an overview of the case itself.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 10, 2021
Kent v. Vilsack: Race-based COVID-19 farm loan forgiveness denies equal treatment to Illinois farmers
Pacific Legal Foundation
Date: Jun. 7, 2021
(Pacific Legal Foundation)
This is a webpage created by plaintiffs' counsel from Kent v. Vilsack (PB-IL-0016). It provides additional information on plaintiffs and an overview of the case itself.*
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 10, 2021
Wynn v. Vilsack: Race-based COVID-19 farm loan forgiveness denies equal treatment to farmers
Pacific Legal Foundation
Date: Jun. 23, 2021
(Pacific Legal Foundation)
This is a webpage created by plaintiff's counsel from Wynn v. Vilsack (PB-FL-0022). It provides additional information on plaintiff and an overview of the case itself.*
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 10, 2021
McKinney v. Vilsack
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 2:21-cv-212 (E.D. Tex.)
PB-TX-0019
A white farmer from Naples, Texas filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Marshall) on June 10, 2021. Plaintiff challenged Section 1005 of the American Rescue Plan, which offered loan forgiveness only to farmers who qualified as "socially disadvantaged." Plaintiff alleged these racial classifications violated the Fifth Amendment's guarantee of equal protection and the Administrative Procedure Act. Plaintiff subsequently moved to preliminarily enjoin Section 1005. Defendants then moved to stay this case pending the outcome of a class-action challenge to Section 1005 in Miller v. Vilsack. Both motions were pending as of July 27, 2021. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PB-TX-0019)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 10, 2021
Faust v. Vilsack
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 21-548 (E.D. Wis.)
PB-WI-0006
Five white farmers filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin (Green Bay) on April 29, 2021. Plaintiffs challenged Section 1005 of the American Rescue Plan which offered loan forgiveness only to farmers who qualified as "socially disadvantaged." They alleged that these racial classifications violated the equal protection components of the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. Plaintiffs obtained a temporary restraining order (TRO) enjoining Section 1005 on June 10, 2021. However, the TRO was later dissolved as a very similar nationwide injunction had been issued in Wynn v. Vilsack. Defendants subsequently moved to stay the case pending the outcome of a class-action challenge to Section 1005 in Miller v. Vilsack.
View Case Detail (PB-WI-0006)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 9, 2021
Darchini v. Pompeo
Law Office of Curtis Morrison
Date: Apr. 6, 2021
By: Law Office of Curtis Morrison
In Darchini v. Pompeo (Now known as Kavoosian v Pompeo), 3 (originally 14) Iranian American families are challenging the U.S. Government’s unreasonable administrative delays in adjudicating case-by-case waivers of under the travel ban. Challenged policies include the U.S. Government’s ...
View Link Detail  


CASE STUDIES
August 9, 2021
"Lee v. Macon County Board of Education: The Possibilities of Federal Enforcement of Equal Educational Opportunity"
Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy
Date: 2016
By: Brian K. Landsberg (Pacific McGeorge School of Law Faculty)
12 Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy 1-52 (2016)
Lee v. Macon County Board of Education shows the evolution of the role of the three branches in enforcing the equal protection clause in public education in Alabama. All three branches initially acquiesced in the separate but equal doctrine. The executive and the judicial branches rejected the ...
View Case Study Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 9, 2021
Lee v. Macon County Board of Education
Encyclopedia of Alabama
Date: Dec. 11, 2013
By: C. J. Schexnayder
Lee v. Macon County Board of Education is a pivotal civil rights case that sought the integration of the all-white Tuskegee High School in Macon County. The initial 1963 lawsuit was later expanded to include all of the state's primary and secondary schools, two-year postsecondary schools, and ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 9, 2021
Wynn v. Vilsack
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 3:21-cv-00514-MMH-JRK (M.D. Fla.)
PB-FL-0022
A white farmer filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida (Jacksonville) on May 18, 2021. Plaintiff challenged Section 1005 of the American Rescue Plan which offered loan forgiveness only to farmers who qualified as "socially disadvantaged." Plaintiff alleged these racial classifications violated the Administrative Procedure Act and the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. Plaintiff obtained a preliminary injunction enjoining Section 1005’s enforcement on June 23, 2021. Defendants subsequently moved to stay the case pending the outcome of a class-action challenge to Section 1005 in Miller v. Vilsack. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PB-FL-0022)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 9, 2021
U.S. v. Desoto Parish School Board
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: 5:67-cv-12589-SMH (W.D. La.)
SD-LA-0010
School desegregation case from Desoto Parish, Louisiana. Filed in 1967, this case dealt with various school districts within the jurisdiction of the Fifth Circuit that instituted "freedom of choice" desegregation plans and were ordered to instead pursue more active integration efforts. It is still ongoing as of 2021, with the Parish filing periodic reports.
View Case Detail (SD-LA-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 9, 2021
Darchini v. Pompeo
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 8:19-cv-01417 (C.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0177
This lawsuit, filed July 22, 2019, challenged the State Department’s implementation of President Trump’s September 24, 2019, Executive Order (EO-3) which was the third of four orders by the former President that restricted travel to the US for nationals of majority Muslim countries. The plaintiffs were 14 Iranian American families who claimed that the State Department failed to properly adjudicate case-by-case waivers to the travel ban’s restrictions on visa issuance in contravention of the waiver process that EO-3 itself laid out and sought declaratory and injunctive relief to remedy the State Department’s Constitutional and Administrative Procedure Act violations. District Court Judge James Selna denied the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction in September 2019 and granted two separate motions to dismiss by the government first in December 2019 and later in March 2020. The plaintiffs appealed the later dismissal to the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Before a hearing could be held on the appeal, President Biden rescinded EO-3 upon his inauguration; the Ninth Circuit held that the case was moot in February 2021 and issued its final mandate on April 6, 2021, ending the case.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0177)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 9, 2021
Joyner v. Vilsack
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 1:21-cv-1089 (W.D. Tenn.)
PB-TN-0010
A farmer filed this lawsuit against the USDA in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee Eastern Division (Jackson) on June 15, 2021. Plaintiff challenged Section 1005 of the American Rescue Plan which offered loan forgiveness only to farmers who qualified as "socially disadvantaged." Plaintiff alleged these racial classifications violated equal protection. However, defendants moved to stay this case pending the outcome of a class-action challenge to Section 1005 in Miller v. Vilsack. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PB-TN-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 9, 2021
Kent v. Vilsack
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 3:21-cv-540 (S.D. Ill.)
PB-IL-0016
Three white farmers filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois (East St. Louis) on June 7, 2021. Plaintiffs challenged Section 1005 of the American Rescue Plan which offered loan forgiveness only to farmers who qualified as "socially disadvantaged." Plaintiffs alleged these racial classifications violated the Administrative Procedure Act and the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. However, proceedings were stayed pending the outcome of a class-action challenge to Section 1005 in Miller v. Vilsack (PB-TX-0017). This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PB-IL-0016)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 9, 2021
Dunlap v. Vilsack
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 2:21-cv-942 (D. Or.)
PB-OR-0007
Two white farmers filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon (Pendleton) on June 24, 2021. Plaintiffs challenged Section 1005 of the American Rescue Plan which offered loan forgiveness only to farmers who qualified as "socially disadvantaged." Plaintiffs alleged that the statute's racial classifications violated the Administrative Procedure Act and the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. Plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction to enjoin Section 1005. However, the government successfully moved to stay proceedings pending the outcome of a class-action challenge to Section 1005 in Miller v. Vilsack (PB-TX-0017). This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PB-OR-0007)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 9, 2021
Handberry v. Thompson
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:96-cv-06161 (S.D.N.Y.)
JC-NY-0050
On August 14, 1996, eleven inmates between the ages of 16 and 21 at Rikers Island filed a class action lawsuit in the District Court for the Southern District of New York under 42 U.S.C.§ 1983 alleging that they were not provided with educational services they were entitled to under federal and state law. On December 31, 2016 Judge Daniels ordered various provisions relating to educational services, like that all eligible inmates be provided a minimum of 3 hours of educational services every school day, and that the DOC must provide special education services to those inmates identified as in need. The judge also recommended that a special master be appointed for a two-year term to monitor and ensure compliance by the DOC and DOE.
View Case Detail (JC-NY-0050)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 9, 2021
Carcaño v. McCrory
Case Category: Public Accomm./Contracting
Trial Docket: 1:16-cv-00236 (M.D. N.C.)
PA-NC-0002
On March 28, 2016, the ACLU and Lamda Legal Fund sued the State of North Carolina on behalf of LGBT individuals over a law called HB2 (the “bathroom bill”), which denied transgender individuals access to single-sex facilities that matched their gender-identities in public buildings. On August 26, 2017 Judge Schroeder of the Middle District of North Carolina granted in part and denied in part the Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction. On May 2, 2017 Judge Schroeder lifted the preliminary injunction with the agreement of all parties, because House Bill 142 repealed the basis for the Court’s prior order. On December 21, 2018, the executive branch defendants and the plaintiff filed a joint motion for a consent decree to settle the claims against the executive branch defendants. After proceedings were stayed pending the Supreme Court ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), the parties' joint motion for consent decree was entered and the case closed with prejudice.
View Case Detail (PA-NC-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 9, 2021
Palacios v. Sessions
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-00026 (W.D.N.C.)
IM-NC-0004
In early 2018, two immigrants detained in North Carolina filed this putative class action in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina. The plaintiffs alleged that three Immigration Judges violated their Fifth Amendment Due Process rights by refusing to exercise jurisdiction over bond hearing requests filed while the plaintiffs were held in the Mecklenburg County Jail Central. The District Court judge dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and denied the plaintiff’s motion to certify the class. In late 2018, the plaintiffs appealed the District Judge’s ruling. The parties were scheduled to appear for oral argument at the end of 2019; however, the parties agreed to remove the case from the Circuit Court calendar in November, 2019. The appeal was subsequently withdrawn and the case closed.
View Case Detail (IM-NC-0004)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 9, 2021
Bagnall v. Sebelius
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 3:11-cv-01703-MPS (D. Conn.)
PB-CT-0013
Medicare beneficiaries who were denied benefits after being placed on "observation status" by hospitals challenged Department of Health and Human Services regulations that govern observation status. Following a successful order to dismiss by the trial court which was reversed on appeal, as well as unsuccessful motions to dismiss and for summary judgement by the government, the plaintiffs achieved class certification and a bench trial was held starting in August, 2019. On March 24, 2020, the district court found that some of the plaintiffs had had their right to due process violated, and entered an injunction against the Secretary. The government appealed this decision in May, 2020; while the issue was on appeal, the Second Circuit stayed the injunction. The case remains open.
View Case Detail (PB-CT-0013)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 8, 2021
Emami v. Nielsen
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-01587-JD (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0140
On March 13, 2018, 26 individuals who had been denied travel visas, or had relatives denied a travel visa under Donald Trump's "Travel Ban" sued the federal government. They claimed that denying individuals' travel visas because of their national origin was unconstitutional and violated federal law. President Biden revoked the “Travel Ban” and ordered that visa applications resume processing on January 20, 2021. In a joint status update filed on June 7, 2021, the parties explained why they had not reached a settlement. The plaintiffs claimed that following the January 20 proclamation from President Biden, the government invited them to reapply for visas, denying them the benefit of their earlier application date. On the other side, the government claimed that because the Proclamation undid the EOs that were the source of the harm experienced by plaintiffs, that there is no live case or controversy for the district court to adjudicate. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0140)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 8, 2021
Sarsour v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-00120 (E.D. Va.)
IM-VA-0005
This lawsuit, filed January 30, 2017, challenged President Trump’s January 27, 2017, Executive Order (EO-1) which barred entry to the US to travelers from seven majority Muslim countries and barred Syrian refugees from entering the US indefinitely. Plaintiffs argued EO-1 violated the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause, the Fifth Amendment’s equal protection, and the Administrative Procedure Act. On March 6, 2017, the President rescinded EO-1 and replaced it with a narrower one (EO-2). Plaintiffs argued that EO-2 still enabled the constitutional and statutory violations of EO-1 despite its changes. On March 24, 2017, the court denied preliminary relief and refused to consider President Trump’s past statements as evidence of discrimination, contrary to the ruling in Hawaii v. Trump . On April 24, 2017, court stayed this case pending the outcome of a Fourth Circuit decision in a similar case IRAP v. Trump. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in late December 2017 responding to the third version of the travel ban (EO-3) but no rulings were ever made on it as the district court granted the government’s January 9, 2018, motion to stay proceedings pending the resolution of the IRAP and Hawaii cases at the Supreme Court. As a result there were no further proceedings in this case between January 2018 and June 2021. President Biden rescinded EO-3 upon his Inauguration, January 20, 2021. As a result, this case was voluntarily dismissed on June 25, 2021.
View Case Detail (IM-VA-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 7, 2021
Wagafe v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:17-cv-00094 (W.D. Wash.)
IM-WA-0031
In 2017, two Muslim men (one a Somali national and lawful permanent resident, the other an Iranian nonimmigrant visa holder) filed this class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington (in Seattle). Suing the federal government, the plaintiffs alleged that US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) interpreted former President Trump’s January 27 executive order (the first of the Travel Ban executive orders) to mandate suspension of adjudication of all pending petitions, applications, or requests from citizens or nationals of the seven banned countries, and that this suspension violated the Administrative Procedure Act, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and the Establishment Clause, Equal Protection Clause, and Due Process Clause of the Constitution. The plaintiffs also alleged that the order had or would expand USCIS's Controlled Application Review and Resolution Program (CARRP), which they argued imposed extra-statutory rules and criteria on Muslim applicants to delay and deny immigration benefits to which applicants were entitled.
View Case Detail (IM-WA-0031)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 7, 2021
P.K. v. Tillerson
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-01533-TSC (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0031
Numerous diversity visa lottery winners filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on August 3, 2017. They challenged the State Department’s practice of denying immigrant visas to diversity lottery winners from countries affected by President Trump’s March 6 Executive Order. Plaintiffs obtained some of the preliminary relief they sought. This included an order from the district court to the State Department to hold unused visas from 2016 for plaintiffs in the event Trump’s executive order was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court. However, in March 2018, the case was dismissed by the district court as moot following the expiration of the executive order at issue. But, this dismissal was reversed on appeal by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in August 2019. Following the inauguration of President Joe Biden, the district court held the case in abeyance. As of this writing, the parties are in settlement negotiations. This case is ongoing
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0031)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 6, 2021
Lee v. Macon County Bd. of Ed.
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: Civ. A. No. 604-E (M.D. Ala.)
SD-AL-0002
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (SD-AL-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 4, 2021
Make the Road New York v. Wolf
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:19-cv-02369-KBJ (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0095
This case concerns the Trump Administration’s decision to dramatically expand “expedited removal,” under which low-level Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) immigration officers were allowed to summarily deport individuals from the United States without a court hearing or opportunity for meaningful review. In 2019, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson granted the plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction and permanently enjoined the Secretary of DHS from enforcing the policy changes in question. The D.C. Circuit Court subsequently reversed the preliminary injunction, finding that while DHS’s actions were subject to judicial review, the rule change implemented constituted agency action committed to agency discretion by law. When the Biden Administration took office, DHS issued a memo indicating the department would be reviewing its rules, policies, and practices concerning immigration enforcement. Although the issue seems resolved for the moment, the plaintiffs argue that the case is still live because the memo did not resolve the underlying issue, which DHS still contended was subject to reasonable interpretation.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0095)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
August 3, 2021
DHS Statement on Treatment of a Full and Unconditional Pardon Issued Under the Law and Process Currently in Place in Connecticut as Effective for Purposes of the INA § 237(a)(2)(A)(vi) Pardon Waiver Clause and 8 C.F.R. § 316.10(c)(2)
Department of Homeland Security
Date: Mar. 23, 2021
By: Department of Homeland Security (U.S. Department of Homeland Security)
Section 237(a)(2)(A)(vi) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) provides that a noncitizen will not be deportable for certain criminal convictions “if [the noncitizen] . . . has been granted a full and unconditional pardon by the President of the United States or by the Governor of any of ...
View Link Detail  


CASE ADDITIONS
August 3, 2021
Donnelly v. Glickman
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: CV-95-04389-DLJ (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0316
The second class-action Title VII suit against the U.S. Forest Service (the first being Bernardi v. Yeutter) alleging sex discrimination. In 1995, plaintiffs filed this case in the Northern District of California, and in 2001, the court approved a consent decree granting administrative injunctions, such as mandatory training and prompt investigation of harassment and reprisal complaints. The decree ended in 2006, and this case is now closed.
View Case Detail (EE-CA-0316)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 3, 2021
California v. Ross
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-01865 (N.D. Cal.)
PB-CA-0049
On March 26, 2018, the State of California filed this claim requesting a permanent injunction to prevent the U.S. Census Bureau from adding a question regarding citizenship to the 2020 Census. California claimed that this action will do irreparable harm to the state depriving them of proportional population representation for elections as well as depriving the state of billions of dollars in federal funding. The plaintiffs claimed that the defendants were in violation of their duty under the Enumeration Clause of the constitution as well as 5 U.S.C §706(a) of the Administrative Procedures Act. The district court found on March 6, 2019, that the decision to add the citizenship question violated the Enumeration Clause and the APA; the government appealed. The Supreme Court ruled in a separate case, Department of Commerce v. New York that the citizenship question was constitutional but remanded back to the district court due to the pretextual nature of the Department’s explanation. On August 1, 2019, Judge Seeborg granted California’s motion to enter final judgement after remand. The Census Bureau was permanently enjoined from adding the citizenship question and the case is now closed.
View Case Detail (PB-CA-0049)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 2, 2021
Community Legal Aid Society, Inc. v. Coupe
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:15-cv-00688-GMS (D. Del.)
PC-DE-0009
In 2015, Community Legal Aid Society filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Represented by the ACLU and private counsel, the plaintiff sued the Delaware Department of Correction claiming constitutionally inadequate treatment, housing, and care of mentally ill prisoners in solitary confinement. On September 1, 2016, Judge Sleet issued an order approving the parties' agreement. The agreement includes specific actions and policies for improving mental health care for inmates, improving conditions of confinement and other aspects of restrictive housing, and reducing the length of disciplinary sanctions and the use of other forms of restrictive housing. A prisoner housed in solitary confinement during the litigation and agreement subsequently filed letters and motions, but on February 13, 2017, the court denied them because the prisoner was not a party to the case and because the case was closed. A motion for contempt by another non-party inmate was similarly dismissed in February, 2021.
View Case Detail (PC-DE-0009)


CASE ADDITIONS
August 2, 2021
Connecticut v. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:19-cv-01597 (D. Conn.)
IM-CT-0013
This is a case regarding the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) interpretation of the Pardon Waiver Clause of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA)(8 U.S.C. §1227). In the summer of 2018, DHS interpreted the Pardon Waiver Clause of the INA to mean that Connecticut’s system of granting pardons did not waive a person’s deportability even if they were granted a pardon by the board. Connecticut argued the DHS interpretation and the department’s pattern and practice of rejecting Connecticut pardons: 1) was not in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act (APA); 2) violated the APA as the change was arbitrary and capricious; and 3) violated the Tenth Amendment of the constitution by attempting to control how the state exercised its pardoning power. Connecticut sought declaratory and injunctive relief. The case closed in September, 2020, after the parties claimed that a resolution of Connecticut’s claims had been reached, but reopened in April, 2021. The case remains open pending resolution of the issue of DHS’s interpretation of the pardon clause of the INA and whether it was reasonable or permissible under the ADA.
View Case Detail (IM-CT-0013)


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
July 29, 2021
La Union Del Pueblo Entero v. Ross
2021 Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law
Date: Oct. 14, 2019
By: Brennan Center for Justice
Numerous Asian-American and Latino groups filed a lawsuit against Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross challenging the Commerce Department’s decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 Census. The plaintiffs argue that the Department’s decision violates the U.S. Constitution and the ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
July 21, 2021
N.C. Court of Appeals Rules That Domestic Violence Protections Must Apply Equally to Unmarried LGBTQ Couples
ACLU of North Carolina
Date: Dec. 31, 2020
By: ACLU North Carolina
RALEIGH, N.C.-- In a victory for LGBTQ equality, unmarried people in same-sex dating relationships can no longer be excluded from domestic violence protections according to a ruling today from the North Carolina Court of Appeals in the case M.E. v. T.J. North Carolina was the last state in the ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
July 21, 2021
Ray et al. v. Himes et al.
ACLU of Ohio
Date: Mar. 29, 2018
By: ACLU Ohio
Ohio, Tennessee, and Puerto Rico are the only U.S. jurisdictions that do not allow transgender people to correct the gender marker on their birth certificates. A birth certificate is an identity document routinely used for many purposes. Ohio provides all other individuals born in the state with a ...
View Link Detail  


CLEARINGHOUSE LINKS TO EXTERNAL RESOURCES
July 21, 2021
Examining Sexual Harassment and Gender Discrimination at the U.S. Department of Agriculture
U.S. Government Publishing Office
Date: Dec. 1, 2016
By: U.S. Government Publishing Office
Hearing before the Committee on Oversight and Government reform at the House of Representatives 114th congress examining sexual harassment and gender discrimination at the U.S. Department of Agriculture. *
View Link Detail  


CASE STUDIES
July 21, 2021
"Gendered Harassment in the U.S. Forest Service"
Women Leading Change, Vol. 3 No. 1 (Oct. 10, 2018), at 73
Date: Oct. 10, 2018
By: Emma Weisner (Tulane University Faculty)
This case study examines the history and current state of gendered harassment in the U.S. Forest Service (USFS). Starting with the Bernardi Consent Decree in 1979 and the Donnelly Consent Decree two decades later, the USFS aimed to make its work environment more hospitable to women and other ...
View Case Study Detail