University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse

Here are the cases added to the Clearinghouse, or updated, over the past 90 days:


CASE ADDITIONS
May 6, 2021
[Redacted Caption] Gov't Ex Parte Submission of Reauthorization Certifications & Related Procedures, Ex Parte Submission of Amended Certifications & Request for an Order Approving Such Certifications & Amended Certifications (Nov. 2020) (702, Boasberg J.)
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: [Redacted] (FISC)
NS-DC-0149
In October 2020, the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence submitted the targeting, minimization, and querying procedures of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), National Security Agency (NSA), and the National Counter-Terrorism Center (NCTC) to the FISC for their annual review. Judge James E. Boasberg approved the new procedures and provided an update on compliance with promises made during the 2019 approval process. The court extended a number of reporting requirements from the 2019 review and imposed additional reporting requirements about data-sharing and bulk queries.
View Case Detail (NS-DC-0149)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 17, 2021
De Leon-Granados v. Eller And Sons Trees, Inc.
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:05-cv-01473 (N.D. Ga.)
IM-GA-0005
A group of public interest law firms filed this class action lawsuit in June, 2005 on behalf of migrant workers against their former employer, alleging gross underpayment in violation of the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (AWPA) and the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Court granted, and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed, class certification for the plaintiffs in September, 2006. The plaintiffs won partial summary judgments in 2008 and 2009, resulting in an eventual award of $11 million in a final judgment in October, 2012.
View Case Detail (IM-GA-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 16, 2021
Chhoeun v. Marin
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 8:17-cv-01898 (C.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0108
Two Cambodian refugees filed this class action suit, on behalf of Cambodian refugees living in the U.S. since the 1970s, challenging ICE for arbitrarily and unlawfully detaining them in 2017. The Court granted a TRO in Dec. 2017 and a PI in Jan. 2018, preventing the government from executing final removal orders before plaintiffs could challenge their removal. The Court granted plaintiffs' habeas claim in Mar. 2018.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0108)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 16, 2021
United States v. David Peebles
Case Category: Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Trial Docket: 21388 (D. Md.)
FH-MD-0005
The DOJ brought suit against a landlord in 1969 under 42 U.S.C. § 3613 seeking a permanent injunction to prevent the landlord from continuing discriminatory housing practices. The complaint alleged that the landlord had explicitly discriminated against prospective tenants on the basis of race. On June 22, 1970, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland issued a consent decree permanently enjoining the defendant from continuing to discriminate against potential tenants on the basis of race.
View Case Detail (FH-MD-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 16, 2021
Miller v. Thurston
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 5:20-cv-05070 (W.D. Ark.)
VR-AR-0196
In April 2020, plaintiffs filed this lawsuit in the Eastern District of Arkansas against the Secretary of State of Arkansas. The plaintiffs alleged that the state’s ballot access provisions were unconstitutional as applied during the COVID-19 pandemic and violated their rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988. The District Court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary judgment in part, enjoining the in-person signature and notarization requirements. It later made this injunction permanent. The defendants appealed the case to the Eighth Circuit, which reversed the District Court’s judgment and grant of permanent injunctive relief.
View Case Detail (VR-AR-0196)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 16, 2021
Aleman Gonzalez v. Sessions
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-01869-JSC (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0120
Two San Francisco Bay Area fathers filed this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California after being detained for over 6 months in ICE custody without a bond hearing. The court granted a preliminary injunction and class certification ordering that individuals detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(6) pending a determination as to whether they can remain in the United States with “live claims” before an adjudicative body cannot be detained for more than 180 days without a bond hearing. The government appealed both orders to the Ninth Circuit, and on April 7, 2020, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's order. Following plaintiffs' motion to enforce the preliminary injunction, the court granted it in part, finding that the defendants had not substantially complied with certain requirements, but denied it in part. As of April 16, 2021, this case is pending a writ of certiorari in front of the Supreme Court.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0120)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 15, 2021
Flores Tejada v. Godfrey
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:16-cv-1454 (W.D. Wash.)
IM-WA-0046
This is a case about individualized custody redetermination hearings for individuals placed in "withholding only" proceedings for prolonged detentions under the Procedures for Asylum and Withholding Removal. On September 14, 2016, a Mexican citizen who had been previously detained filed this class action lawsuit against the local Field Office Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the Director of ICE, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, the Director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, the Attorney General of the U.S., and the warden of the Northwest Detention Center under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), the Administrative Procedure Act, the Suspension Clause of the U.S. Constitution, Habeas Corpus, and the All Writs Act. Represented by the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, the plaintiff claimed that the defendants denied due process rights and violated the INA by detaining plaintiff class members for more than six months and by not offering individualized hearings. The district court granted injunctive relief on April 4, 2018, requiring the defendants to provide hearings every six months. On April 7, 2020, the Ninth Circuit reversed the requirement to provide additional hearings after the first six-month hearing. The defendants have filed a petition with the Supreme Court, and the case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-WA-0046)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 15, 2021
Armstrong v. Newsom
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 4:94-cv-02307-CW (N.D. Cal.)
PC-CA-0001
Disabled prisoners and parolees in California filed a class action lawsuit in 1994 in the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California, charging that, on account of their disabilities, the state was depriving disabled prisoners of benefits and accommodations provided to other prisoners or required by due process. They sought declaratory and injunctive relief for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), the Rehabilitation Act ("RA"), and the Due Process Clause of the Constitution. In a series of injunctions and remedial orders, the court ordered that the State had to identify and track disabled prisoners and parolees and provide reasonable accommodations in prison facilities and at parole hearings. The court has declared that failing to adhere to the ADA and its prior orders on the grounds of shortage of bed space is impermissible and a violation of law. Currently the State is under extensive monitoring by plaintiff's counsel. The court granted injunctive relief for one prison on September 8, 2020, and for five more on March 11, 2021. The defendants appealed both injunctions. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PC-CA-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 15, 2021
Smith v. Barr
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-00630-JRS (S.D. Ind.)
PC-IN-0027
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PC-IN-0027)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 15, 2021
O'Hanlon v. Uber
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 2:19-cv-00675 (W.D. Pa.)
DR-PA-0009
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (DR-PA-0009)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 11, 2021
Aref v. Holder
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:10-cv-00539-RMU (D.D.C.)
PC-DC-0023
Five prisoners in the custody of the BOP filed suit in April 2010 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia alleging violations of their First, Fifth, and Eighth Amendment rights as well as a violation of the APA's notice and comment rulemaking requirement. The prisoners had been transferred to experimental "Communications Management Units," (CMUs), which restricted their ability to communicate and banned physical contact with visitors. The District Court granted summary judgment for the defendants, but the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded in part. Some of the plaintiffs were released from prison, and the court held their claims were moot. The defendants won a summary judgment motion against the remaining plaintiffs in October 2020, which the plaintiffs have appealed.
View Case Detail (PC-DC-0023)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 10, 2021
Cole v. Memphis
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 2:13-cv-02117 (W.D. Tenn.)
PN-TN-0002
A police officer and ATF agent filed this class action lawsuit against the City of Memphis, Tennessee for a police practice known as the "Beale Street Sweep." This practice led to abusive behavior and unlawful arrests by the MPD in violation of the plaintiffs' Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The Court granted class certification for the plaintiffs and denied summary judgment for the City. A jury returned a verdict for the plaintiffs, and the Court granted monetary and injunctive relief. Memphis tried to appeal to the Sixth Circuit, which affirmed the District Court's judgment. Memphis also unsuccessfully petitioned the Supreme Court for certiorari. It was subsequently ordered to pay supplemental fees to the plaintiffs.
View Case Detail (PN-TN-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 9, 2021
Self Advocacy Solutions v. Jaeger
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-00071 (D.N.D.)
VR-ND-0005
On May 1, 2020, Self Advocacy Solutions N.D., League of Women Voters of North Dakota, and an individual plaintiff filed a complaint against the Secretary of State of North Dakota and the County Auditor of Grand Forks County to challenge the absence of notice and cure procedures for the state’s signature matching requirement. The plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief. The plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction on May 11, which the court granted on June 3. On August 28, the court granted the plaintiffs' requested permanent injunction. The case is now closed.
View Case Detail (VR-ND-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 9, 2021
Alcantara v. Archambeault
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-00756 (S.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0176
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0176)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 9, 2021
SawariMedia LLC v. Whitmer
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 4:20-cv-11246 (E.D. Mich.)
VR-MI-0077
This suit was brought by three voters and an advocacy organization seeking to place an initiative on Michigan’s 2020 general election ballot. The plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief requiring the defendants to enjoin the ballot-access signature requirement and filing deadline. The plaintiffs also filed a temporary restraining order (TRO) barring the defendants from enforcing the deadline. On June 11, the preliminary injunction was granted, and the defendants appealed to the Sixth Circuit. The Sixth Circuit denied to stay the preliminary injunction pending appeal. On July 23, 2020, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the case after one of the plaintiffs amended her previous statements regarding the number of signatures that the plaintiffs had gathered. The case is now closed.
View Case Detail (VR-MI-0077)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 8, 2021
Gulino v. New York City Board of Education
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:96-cv-08414-KMW (S.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0260
In 1996, Black and Latinx teachers in the New York City Public School System filed this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, under Title VI, Title VII and state laws, against the Board of Education of the New York City School District of the City of New York and the New York State Education Department. They claimed that the defendants misused two discriminatory tests, requiring them to pass as a condition to receive teaching licenses and employment benefits. The District Court certified a (b)(2) and (b)(3) class and eventually dismissed the Title VI claims on a summary judgment motion. After a bench trial, the court found in favor of the defendants with regard to the plaintiffs' Title VII claims. The plaintiffs appealed. The Second Circuit reversed and remanded. Eventually, the court enjoined the defendants from using the LAST test as a condition to receive teaching licenses. The court also started issuing individual judgments for monetary relief, which the defendants appealed to the Second Circuit. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (EE-NY-0260)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 8, 2021
Blackmon-Malloy v. U.S. Capitol Police Board
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:01-cv-02221-EGS-JMF (D.D.C.)
EE-DC-0051
This case was brought by several African-American current or former U.S. Capitol Police Officers against the United States Capitol Police Board. Plaintiffs sought compensatory damages and injunctive relief, alleging that Defendant engaged in a pattern and practice of race discrimination in employment. On October 13, 2016, the court granted defendant's motion to dismiss most of plaintiffs' claims. The plaintiffs filed a motion to reconsider which the court denied, and the court reaffirmed its reasoning on July 30, 2019. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (EE-DC-0051)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 8, 2021
Ray v. Judicial Corrections Services
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 2:12-cv-02819 (N.D. Ala.)
CJ-AL-0006
Alabama residents alleged that an Alabama town had been using a private for-profit company to collect fines, costs, and fees. The company employees were called "probation officers," constructed documents that appeared to be court orders, and imprisoned people who could not pay the fines or fees. The plaintiffs in this federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama alleged that the defendants were violating both due process and equal protection (among other violations) because they incarcerated people for inability to pay fines due to indigency, because they did not provide proper notice or lawyers, and because they imposed terms of incarceration and costs that exceeded the statutory maximum allowed under state law. The case was dismissed with prejudice.
View Case Detail (CJ-AL-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 8, 2021
Sourovelis v. City of Philadelphia
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 2:14-cv-04687-ER (E.D. Pa.)
CJ-PA-0002
On Aug. 11, 2014, four individuals sued the City of Philadelphia, the Mayor, the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office, the District Attorney, and the Commissioner of the Philadelphia Police Department, alleging that the defendants’ policies and practices with regard to civil forfeitures violated due process. Following settlement negotiations, the parties reached a set of consent decrees as to the claims for relief.
View Case Detail (CJ-PA-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 8, 2021
Breen v. Mineta
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 1:05-cv-00654-RWR (D.D.C.)
EE-DC-0040
This case was brought on March 31, 2005, by current and former employees of the Federal Aviation Administration who were 40 years old or older against the Administrator of the FAA and the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation. Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, back pay and benefits, front pay, record correction, and attorneys' fees, alleging that the FAA and DOT discriminated against them by targeting their jobs for outsourcing and terminating their federal employment in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. On May 26, 2017, Judge Friedman granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment regarding the plaintiffs' disparate impact claim but denied the motion regarding the plaintiffs' disparate treatment claims. The case is ongoing, with the parties having reached a settlement on April 8, 2021.
View Case Detail (EE-DC-0040)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 8, 2021
United States v. Jefferson County
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:75-cv-00666-CLS (N.D. Ala.)
EE-AL-0097
On May 27, 1975 The United States Department of Justice ("D.O.J.") filed this lawsuit under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e, et seq., and 42 U.S.C. § 1983, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama against the Jefferson County Personnel Board, and the municipal and other governmental jurisdictions within Jefferson County. The Plaintiffs claimed that the Defendants had discriminatory employment practices against Black people and women, and demanded monetary and injunctive relief. The parties entered several Consent Decrees aimed at correcting these practices, which were monitored closely by the courts for several decades. All of the consent decree were eventually modified. The County and the Board were both held in contempt for noncompliance, and were subject to receivership.The consent decrees against the Board, City, and County have all been dismissed. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (EE-AL-0097)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 8, 2021
DOJ CRIPA Investigation of Four Mississippi Prisons
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: (No Court)
PC-MS-0010
The DOJ began a CRIPA investigation of Mississippi Department of Corrections Facilities in February of 2020. The investigation is ongoing as of April 2021.
View Case Detail (PC-MS-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 7, 2021
Rabin v. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 4:16-cv-02276-JST (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0360
On April 27, 2016, the plaintiff, a certified public accountant over the age of forty, filed this class and collective action against PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. The defendant moved for a judgement on the pleadings and was denied; the plaintiff moved to certify a class and the motion was denied. The plaintiff filed a renewed motion for class certification on August 27, 2018, which was granted. The parties proposed an $11 million settlement that included changes to hiring practices, and the court approved the settlement on February 4, 2021. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (EE-CA-0360)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 5, 2021
ACLU v. Trump
Case Category: Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-01351 (D.D.C.)
PR-DC-0006
In 2017 the ACLU filed this suit for injunctive, mandamus, and declaratory relief against President Trump, Vice-President Pence, and the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, alleging violations of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The court denied the Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, claiming that jurisdiction for mandamus relief did not exist. President Trump ultimately dissolved the Commission, and the case is stayed pending the outcome of a related case, Dunlap v. Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity.
View Case Detail (PR-DC-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 2, 2021
Brackeen v. Zinke
Case Category: Child Welfare
Trial Docket: 4:17-cv-00868 (N.D. Tex.)
CW-TX-0002
On 2017, foster parents and three states filed a suit challenging the constitutionality of the Indian Child Welfare Act (the "ICWA"). Plaintiffs allege the ICWA violates the Equal Protection Clause and anti-commandeering principles. The district court held the ICWA is unconstitutional which was partially affirmed in a fractured en banc opinion by the Fifth Circuit. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (CW-TX-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 2, 2021
Thompson v. Trump
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 1:21-cv-00400 (D.D.C.)
VR-DC-1178
On January 6, 2021, there was a violent insurrection and disruption of Congressional processes as members approved the results of the Electoral College in order to elect the next President and Vice President of the United States. On February 16, 2021, a U.S. Representative, in his personal capacity, sued the President of the United States in his personal capacity, the President’s personal lawyer, Proud Boys International, and Oath Keepers under the Ku Klux Klan Act alleging that the defendants plotted, coordinated, and executed a common plan to prevent Congress from certifying the results of the 2020 presidential election. This case has been assigned to Judge Amit P. Mehta and is ongoing.
View Case Detail (VR-DC-1178)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 2, 2021
De La Fuente v. Hobbs
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-01276 (D. Ariz.)
VR-AZ-0059
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (VR-AZ-0059)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 1, 2021
Amanda D. v. Hassan
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 1:12-CV-00053-SM (D.N.H.)
PB-NH-0003
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (PB-NH-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 1, 2021
Heyer v. United States Bureau of Prisons
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 5:11-ct-03118-D (E.D.N.C.)
PC-NC-0014
In 2011, two deaf prisoners filed a lawsuit against the United States Bureau of Prisons in the US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina. The plaintiffs alleged violations of the Rehabilitation Act, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, their Fifth Amendment due process rights, First Amendment Freedom of Speech, and First Amendment Free Exercise of Religion. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that the defendants refused to provide them with effective communication and auxiliary aids necessary to accommodate their disability.
View Case Detail (PC-NC-0014)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 1, 2021
Don't Shoot Portland v. City of Portland
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-00917 (D. Or.)
PN-OR-0002
On June 5, 2020, a non-profit corporation advocating for social and racial justice and individual citizens filed this class action suit in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. The plaintiffs sued the City of Portland, alleging that the Portland police violated plaintiffs' First and Fourth Amendment rights by indiscriminately using tear gas against protestors involved in protected speech. They sought injunctive relief enjoining Portland police from using tear gas. On June 9, the court granted the TRO and enjoined the defendants from using tear gas. The following week, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, alleging that the defendants had changed their methods since the TRO, using "less-lethal” weapons against plaintiffs instead, and an additional TRO was issued related to the less-lethal weapons. On June 30, the plaintiffs moved for a finding of contempt and for sanctions against the defendant for non-compliance, which was later withdrawn. They also sought a preliminary injunction. On June 9, the court granted the plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order in part and restricted the use of tear gas to situations in which the lives or safety of the public or the police were at risk. The parties later stipulated to an additional TRO which additionally restricted the use of less-lethal launchers, rubber ball distraction devices, aerosol restraints, and long-range acoustical devices. On June 30, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a finding of contempt and sanctions against the defendant. After briefing and oral argument, the court granted the motion in part; the parties exchanged remedy proposals and filed a joint remedy proposal on December 18. On March 16, 2021, the court ordered sanctions that included training for Portland Police Bureau officers and circulating the TRO. The case is ongoing as of April 1, 2021.
View Case Detail (PN-OR-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
April 1, 2021
Crum v. State of Alabama
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:94-cv-00356 (M.D. Ala.)
EE-AL-0100
In this case filed in 1994, Alabama state employees claimed endemic race discrimination by a state government boards and departments, including the Department of Public Health and the Alabama Labor Board. A large number of complaints were consolidated, and years of litigation followed. In 2009, however, the Court denied class certification, and allowed all the previously consolidated cases to proceed separately. Over time, individual plaintiffs either stipulated to dismiss their claims or saw their claims dismissed by the court. In August 2017, the case was closed as the last plaintiff's case was converted into a separate lawsuit.
View Case Detail (EE-AL-0100)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 31, 2021
Dubon Miranda v. Barr
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-01110 (D. Md.)
IM-MD-0019
On April 30, 2020, the three immigration detainees in Maryland filed a class action lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s failure to provide fair hearings to people in immigration detention on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated. The complaint and habeas corpus petition pointed to two flaws in the government's bond hearings that made subsequent detentions a violation of procedural due process and the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). On May 5, 2020, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a temporary restraining order and/or preliminary injunction, which was granted on May 29. On July 27, 2020, the defendants appealed the preliminary injunction to the Fourth Circuit (No. 20-1828). The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-MD-0019)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 31, 2021
Karsjens v. Minnesota Department of Human Services
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 0:11-cv-03659-DWF-JJK (D. Minn.)
CJ-MN-0002
Patients currently civilly committed in the Minnesota Sex Offender Program (MSOP) filed a lawsuit against the Minnesota Department of Health & Human Services and MSOP seeking injunctive relief and damages. They alleged that defendants violated the Due Process Clause, the First Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, the Minnesota Constitution, and the Minnesota Civil Commitment and Treatment Act. The Court certified this group as a class. On August 15, 2012, the Court ordered that the Minnesota Commissioner of Human Services create a Sex Offender Civil Commitment Advisory Task Force. On June 17, 2015, the court granted the plaintiffs' request for declaratory relief, but on January 3, 2017 the Eighth Circuit reversed the district court's ruling. After the district court issued a new order in light of that remand, the plaintiffs appealed and the Eighth Circuit affirmed in part and denied in part that judgment on February 24, 2021. The appeals court remanded the case and it is ongoing.
View Case Detail (CJ-MN-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 31, 2021
Pars Equality Center v. Pompeo
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:18-cv-01122 (W.D. Wash.)
IM-WA-0040
On July 31, 2018, two non-profit organizations and fifteen individuals filed this class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The plaintiffs challenged the Trump Administration's implementation of the waiver provision of the Travel Ban (Presidential Proclamation No. 9645), alleging that it violates the Administrative Procedure Act and the Fifth Amendment. The case was transferred to the Northern District of California. After the Trump Administration concluded, President Biden revoked the Travel Ban and ordered that visa applications resume processing on January 20, 2021. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-WA-0040)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 31, 2021
Williams v. Mohawk Industries
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 4:04-cv-00003-HLM (N.D. Ga.)
IM-GA-0002
On January 6, 2004, current and former employees of Mohawk Industries Inc., a giant carpet and rug manufacturer, filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court Northern District of Georgia, alleging that Mohawk engaged in a massive scheme to hire undocumented immigrants for the express purpose of depressing employee wages. Plaintiff alleged that defendants' scheme violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"), 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq., and the Immigration and Nationality Act. On July 22, 2010, the District Court approved a settlement between the parties, which included an $18 million settlement fund and a commitment from the defendants to conduct training regarding verification of employment eligibility. This case has finished.
View Case Detail (IM-GA-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 30, 2021
Electronic Privacy Information Center v. U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-02684 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0042
This Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) complaint was filed on Dec. 15, 2017. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) sued Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for records pertaining to the data collection systems FALCON and Investigative Case Management (ICM). EPIC argued that ICE's use of these systems risked violating the Privacy Act of 1974 and the E-Government Act. ICE finished document production by November 2018. On July 25, 2019, EPIC raised challenges to specific withholdings of documents, and ICE released the withheld documents. On January 31, 2020, the parties settled, with EPIC receiving attorneys' fees. This case has finished.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0042)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 30, 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 have been denied a travel visa, or have had relatives denied a travel visa under Donald Trump's "Travel Ban" sued the Trump Administration claiming the Travel Ban's policy of 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. The case is currently ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0140)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 30, 2021
Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center (CREEC) v. Hospitality Properties Trust
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 3:15-cv-00221 (N.D. Cal.)
DR-CA-0053
The CREEC and three plaintiffs who require wheelchairs for mobility brought this class action suit for declaratory and injunctive relief against Hospitality Properties Trust (HPT). Plaintiffs asked that the court declare HPT's practices of not providing wheelchair-accessible vehicles to guests with disabilities to be in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act and Unruh Civil Rights Act. Further, plaintiffs requested an injunction compelling HPT to comply with the ADA and Unruh Civil Rights Act. The plaintiff sought for a class certification; however, it was denied for lack of commonality and typicality. The defendant sought summary judgment, claiming it was not a responsible entity under ADA, but the court denied the motion. The parties reached a settlement in January 2020. The Clearinghouse does not have access to the settlement, but according to CREEC, HPT agreed to provide transportation at the covered hotels that complied with the ADA.
View Case Detail (DR-CA-0053)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 29, 2021
Disability Rights Florida v. Jones
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-00179-HES-JRK (M.D. Fla.)
DR-FL-0006
In 2018, Disability Rights Florida filed suit against the Florida Department of Corrections (FDC) in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida for declaratory and injunctive relief. The plaintiff alleged that FDOC failed to provide adequate mental health treatment to its prisoners in violation of the Eighth Amendment, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Rehabilitation Act. The parties reached a settlement that involved substantive reforms to the mental health treatment system, ongoing compliance monitoring, and attorneys' fees.
View Case Detail (DR-FL-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 26, 2021
Trump v. Deutsche Bank
Case Category: Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority
Trial Docket: 1:19-cv-03826 (S.D.N.Y.)
PR-NY-0009
This is a case about former President Donald Trump’s dispute with Congressional subpoenas requesting personal tax and financial documents. The case was brought in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by Donald Trump, his children, and other affiliates, on April 29, 2019. The complaint alleged that the Congressional subpoenas were issued to harass the President and lacked a legitimate legislative purpose. The case was eventually consolidated with Trump v. Mazars, LLP, which was heard by the Supreme Court in July 2020 and later remanded for further proceedings.
View Case Detail (PR-NY-0009)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 26, 2021
Briggs v. Elliott
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: Civ. A. No. 2657 (D.S.C.)
SD-SC-0001
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (SD-SC-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 26, 2021
Whitfield v. Thurston
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 4:20-cv-00466 (E.D. Ark.)
VR-AR-0194
In April 2020, two independent candidates for public office in Arkansas filed this lawsuit in the Eastern District of Arkansas against the Secretary of State of Arkansas. The plaintiffs alleged that the state’s ballot access provisions were overly restrictive, particularly in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, and violated the First and Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court denied the plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction and entered a judgment in favor of the defendant. The plaintiffs have appealed this case to the Eight Circuit, which has not issued an opinion yet. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (VR-AR-0194)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 25, 2021
Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-00302-RPM (D. Colo.)
IM-CO-0011
The Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center (CREEC) filed this suit against DHS and ICE under FOIA, seeking information regarding substandard and abusive conditions of confinement against individuals detained at two immigration detention facilities. As of March 25, 2021, a settlement has been reached as to the evidence, but litigation continues for the plaintiff's attorney's fees and costs.
View Case Detail (IM-CO-0011)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 25, 2021
A.I.I.L. v. Sessions
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 4:19-cv-00481-JAS (D. Ariz.)
IM-AZ-0028
In October 2019, immigrant children and their parents filed a putative class-action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for Arizona. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants violated their constitutional rights under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments by separating children from their parents at the U.S. border. The case is ongoing
View Case Detail (IM-AZ-0028)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 25, 2021
Muhammad v. Terhune
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: No. 99-cv-02773 (D.N.J.)
PC-NJ-0014
This is a case involving Muslim prisoner's First and Fourteenth Amendment claims for the provision of Halal meat. The parties reached an agreement under which the prison would sell Halal meat to prisoners, but it is not clear whether the prison ever agreed to prison to provide Halal meat for free as the plaintiffs requested.
View Case Detail (PC-NJ-0014)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 25, 2021
Big House Books v. Hall
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-00259-DPJ-FKB (S.D. Miss.)
PC-MS-0008
In April 2018, two prisoners at the South Mississippi Correctional Institution (SMCI) and non-profit Big House Books filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi. The plaintiffs sued SMCI and the Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC), alleging that the MDOC’s new policy of barring prisoners from receiving free books unless they are religious books violates the First and the Fourteenth Amendments. After little activity in the case, the court issued an order to show cause why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. The parties then filed a stipulated of dismissal on December 19, 2018, indicating that earlier in the year the parties reached an agreement to settle the case. The defendants changed their policies and practices so that prisoners could receive free books from distributors like the plaintiff whether or not they were religious. The defendants also agreed to pay the plaintiffs $6,000 in attorney fees. This case is now closed.
View Case Detail (PC-MS-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 24, 2021
United States v. Louisiana
Case Category: Public Benefits / Government Services
Trial Docket: 3:18-cv-608 (M.D. La.)
PB-LA-0008
The Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against Louisiana alleging that their policies of institutionalizing individuals with serious mental illnesses was operated in a manner that too often resulted in unnecessary admission to nursing facilties when community-based services would be more appropriate. The US alleged that this violated Title II of the American's with Disabilities Act which requires that states serve individuals with disabilities in the least segregated manner appropriate to their needs. Louisiana reached a settlement agreement with the US the same day the lawsuit was filed. The state agreed to review its nursing facilities and new referrals for admission to determine whether seriously mentally ill residents would be better served in their communities. They also agreed to expand community-based services for the mentally ill.
View Case Detail (PB-LA-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 24, 2021
Catchings v. Wilson
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:21-cv-00428-GLR (D. Md.)
JC-MD-0018
In 2021, individuals held at the Chesapeake Detention Facility filed this class action lawsuit and habeas petition which alleged numerous issues with the facility's response to COVID-19. The plaintiffs alleged that their rights under their Fifth, Fourteenth, and Eighth Amendments were violated by the risk they faced of contracting COVID-19 and by the defendants' policies of placing individuals in effective solitary confinement. They asked the court for a temporary restraining order governing conditions in the facility; however, prior to the resolution of that motion, they reached an agreement with the defendants regarding certain precautions to take. However, the case is still proceeding to determine whether the court should issue a preliminary or permanent injunction against the defendants.
View Case Detail (JC-MD-0018)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 22, 2021
Raimondo v. Federal Bureau of Investigation
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 3:13-cv-02295-JSC (N.D. Cal.)
NS-CA-0020
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (NS-CA-0020)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 21, 2021
Council on American-Islamic Relations - Chicago v. U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-03097 (N.D. Ill.)
IM-IL-0021
In May 2018, the Council on American-Islamic Relations - Chicago (CAIR-Chicago) filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The plaintiff sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services for failing to process its FOIA request for immigration records since the 2008 institution of the Controlled Application Review & Resolution Program, alleging that this conduct was a wrongful delay of release of records in violation of FOIA. The plaintiffs dismissed their claims without explanation on June 28, 2019.
View Case Detail (IM-IL-0021)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 21, 2021
Padilla v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 2:18-cv-00928 (W.D. Wash.)
IM-WA-0038
Three plaintiffs, mothers of minor children, filed this class action complaint challenging the federal government's forcible separation of minor children from their parents, as well as its practice of prolonging the separation by failing to conduct credible fear interviews in a timely manner and its practice of excessively prolonging the detention of asylum seekers by delaying their bond hearings. They plan not to pursue the separation claims, pending the government's compliance with a nationwide injunction against family separation, but they continue to seek relief for the bond hearings claims. The district court certified two classes; the Credible Fear Interview Class and the Bond Hearing Class. The district court ordered a preliminary injunction, mandating that the government conduct bond hearings within seven days of a bond request and finding that denying bond hearings to these class members is unconstitutional. In March 2020, a Ninth Circuit panel affirmed the district court's nationwide preliminary injunction and remanded proceedings to the district court to reconsider the procedures for the bond hearings. The defendants filed a writ of certiorari in the Supreme Court, seeking further review of the Ninth Circuit's decision. The Supreme Court granted the cert petition on January 11, 2021. In the same order, it vacated the judgment and remanded the case the Ninth Circuit in light of the Court’s decision in Thuraissigiam v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security earlier in the summer. The defendants then requested the Ninth Circuit hold the appeal in abeyance. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-WA-0038)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 19, 2021
State of California v. Sessions
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:17-cv-04701 (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0094
On Aug. 14, 2017, California sued the DOJ over policies targeting "sanctuary" jurisdictions by imposing immigration enforcement conditions on federal funding for law enforcement. In October 2018 the district court granted summary judgment for California and issued a nationwide injunction. The DOJ appealed to the Ninth Circuit. On July 13, 2020, the Ninth Circuit upheld the bases for the injunction but limited its scope, thus reducing it from a nationwide injunction to one applicable only within California's borders. The government then filed for review with the Supreme Court but dismissed their petition following the change in administration from President Trump to President Biden.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0094)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 18, 2021
Iranian Alliances Across Borders v. Trump
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 8:17-cv-02921-GJH (D. Md.)
IM-MD-0005
On October 2, 2017 the Iranian Alliances Across Borders filed this complaint on behalf of a group of plaintiffs of Iranian descent. The suit challenges President Trumps Sept. 24 Proclamation indefinitely restricting travel from the following eight countries: Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela and Yemen. Otherwise known as EO-3, the proclamation was the President's third attempt to restrict travel from particular countries. The first attempt was by and Executive Order (EO) issued in Jan. 2017. In response to that order, a slew of litigation ensued. That litigation, and the decisions it led to, eventually led the President to issue a new, revised order. However, the litigation continued, and in September President issued his proclamation just as the second EO was about to expire. In response to that proclamation, and alongside other suits challenging the EOs, plaintiffs filed their complaint in the Maryland District Court. Judge Chuang was assigned to the case. In their complaint, plaintiffs alleged that the proclamation targeted and discriminated against Muslims and that it violated the Immigration and Nationality Act by discriminating based on national origin. Plaintiffs also alleged that the order violated the First Amendment's Establishment and Free Speech Clauses and the Fifth Amendment's Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses. As relief, plaintiffs requested a nationwide injunction barring the government from enforcing the new order.
View Case Detail (IM-MD-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 18, 2021
Adam v. Pompeo
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-03079-SAG (D. Md.)
IM-MD-0018
On October 20, 2020, the two Sudanese refugees filed suit alleging violations of the APA and the Fifth Amendment due process clause for failure to adjudicate their follow-to-join (FTJ) petitions in a reasonable time. The plaintiffs sought an order to compel the defendants to promptly adjudicate their FTJ petitions under 28 U.S.C. § 1361. The case is ongoing as of March 3, 2021.
View Case Detail (IM-MD-0018)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 17, 2021
FHJC v. Esplanade Venture Partnership et al.
Case Category: Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-03600 (S.D.N.Y.)
FH-NY-0028
In the fall of 2012, the Fair Housing Justice Center received a complaint alleging that the Esplanade Residences refused to rent to people who use wheelchairs. As a result, the FHJC launched an investigation into the matter by sending "testers" to observe the residences' polices while posing as potential renters. Based on the investigation's results, on May 29, 2013, the FHJC filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York under the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3601. It alleged violations of the FHA for discrimination of the bases of disability, religion, and race, as well as violations of state fair housing laws. The parties reached a settlement on December 11, 2014 and a stipulation for voluntary dismissal was filed on January 8, 2015. The settlement included policy changes to conform the defendants' policies to the requirements of the Fair Housing Act, as well as a monetary settlement of $297,500 for damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs.
View Case Detail (FH-NY-0028)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 17, 2021
Fenty v. Penzone
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-01192-SPL (D. Ariz.)
JC-AZ-0016
In 2020, individuals held in Maricopa County's jails filed this class action lawsuit and habeas petition to challenge the jails' response to COVID-19. The plaintiffs alleged that their constitutional rights and statutory rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Rehabilitation Act were violated by the defendants' lack of action to protect them from COVID-19. They requested the certification of several classes, which was granted, and a preliminary injunction, including the release of medically vulnerable individuals, which was not. The case is ongoing
View Case Detail (JC-AZ-0016)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 16, 2021
Bhattarai v. Nielsen
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:19-cv-00731 (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0145
On Feb. 10, 2019, a group of TPS beneficiaries from Honduras and Nepal and their U.S.-citizen children filed this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, challenging the Department of Homeland Security's decisions to terminate TPS designations for those two countries. The plaintiffs alleged that these decisions violated the APA, equal protection, and due process. In March, 2019, the case was stayed pending the resolution of an appeal in a parallel case, Ramos v. Nielsen, challenging TPS rescissions for another group of countries. As of March 16, 2021, DHS had extended TPS for Honduras and Nepal through October 4, 2021
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0145)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 16, 2021
Payne v. de Blasio
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-08924 (S.D.N.Y.)
PN-NY-0057
Eleven New York City residents filed this lawsuit against the City of New York and the NYPD on December 14, 2020. The suit alleged that the NYPD falsely arrested and used excessive force against peaceful protesters during the 2020 racial justice protests in violation of the First and Fourth Amendments, as well as the New York State Constitution. It further alleged that the plaintiffs suffered physical and mental injuries as a result of the NYPD's practice of using excessive force against peaceful protesters. The plaintiffs sought declaratory relief, compensatory and punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and costs, and any other relief the Court deemed just and proper.
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0057)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 16, 2021
Wood v. De Blasio
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-10541 (S.D.N.Y.)
PN-NY-0058
A Queens resident filed this lawsuit against the NYPD on December 14, 2020. The suit alleged that the NYPD regularly falsely arrested and used excessive force against peaceful protesters during the 2020 racial justice protests in violation of the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments. It also alleged the common law violations of assault, battery, and false arrest and imprisonment by NYPD officers. The amended complaint requested class certification with the plaintiff as class representative. The plaintiff sought compensatory and punitive damages, reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees, and any other relief the Court deemed just and proper to the plaintiff and class members.
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0058)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 16, 2021
Sow v. City of New York
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:21-cv-00533 (S.D.N.Y.)
PN-NY-0059
A group of ten New York City residents filed this class action suit against the NYPD and the City of New York on January 21, 2021. The suit alleged that the NYPD regularly falsely arrested and used excessive force against peaceful protesters during the 2020 racial justice protests in violation of the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments. The plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief, compensatory and punitive damages, reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees, and any other relief the Court deemed just and proper to the plaintiffs and class members.
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0059)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 14, 2021
United States v. Charter Realty Company
Case Category: Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Trial Docket: 196-73 (E.D. Va.)
FH-VA-0007
This is a case about racial discrimination perpetuated by a Virginia real estate company. On May 14, 1973, the United States Department of Justice sued the Charter Realty Company under the Fair Housing Act, claiming that the defendant was engaged in a pattern and practice of denying Fair Housing rights by failing to provide Black people with the same level of real estate brokerage services provided to white people. Because the defendant expressed a willingness to cooperate, the plaintiff agreed not to pursue litigation to determine whether the defendant had engaged in discriminatory conduct in the past. Instead, the court approved a consent decree on the day the complaint was filed. The decree enjoined the defendant from engaging in discriminatory behavior on account of race, color, religion, or national origin. The defendant also agreed to create a program to comply with the FHA and file periodic reports with the court for two years following the consent decree. The consent decree is the only document available for this case, so no other information is known.
View Case Detail (FH-VA-0007)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 12, 2021
Human Rights First v. Wolf
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-03764 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0091
Plaintiff human rights organization sued the Acting Secretary of Homeland Security alleging that revisions to asylum eligibility violated several laws. Federal courts reviewing similar suits in other districts granted a nationwide preliminary injunction that applied here, and the cases are pending review and revision by the Biden administration.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0091)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 12, 2021
Pangea Legal Services v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-09253 (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0173
Legal organizations sued the Department of Homeland Security for allegedly creating over-restrictive rules regarding asylum-seekers. The court reviewed this and a related case and granted a preliminary injunction enjoining the enactment of the changed rules. Due to the administration change, this suit has been stayed pending a review and potential modification of the relevant regulations.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0173)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 12, 2021
Immigration Equality v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-09258 (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0174
Nonprofit organizations serving LGBTQIA+/H populations sued the Department of Homeland Security alleging that the latter's revised rules surrounding asylum seekers were overly restrictive. The court granted a preliminary injunction and has since stayed the case due to the administration change pending review and revision of the regulations.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0174)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 12, 2021
N.H. ex rel J.H. v. Edwards
Case Category: Juvenile Institution
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-00293-JWD-EWD (M.D. La.)
JI-LA-0013
The plaintiffs filed suit in the Middle District of Louisiana, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and its severity in Louisiana, on behalf of children confined in four secure care facilities. The plaintiffs sought a temporary restraining order that would require improved testing measures, better care of the children confined, and the release of children who were within 180 days of their release dates or were presumptively eligible for release. They further requested an order requiring the defendants to give the plaintiffs access to confidential communication with their counsel. The parties reached a confidential settlement agreement and after a conditional dismissal period, the case is now closed.
View Case Detail (JI-LA-0013)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 12, 2021
Alsaada v. City of Columbus
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 2:20-cv-03431 (S.D. Ohio)
PN-OH-0010
Individual plaintiffs sued the city of Columbus, Ohio and multiple police officers after protesting the murder of George Floyd. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants violated their First and Fourth Amendment rights by using excessive force to infringe upon their freedom to assemble.
View Case Detail (PN-OH-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 11, 2021
Oglala Sioux Tribe v. Van Hunnik
Case Category: Child Welfare
Trial Docket: 5:13-cv-05020-JLV (D.S.D.)
CW-SD-0001
This is a class action lawsuit by Native American parents in Pennington County, South Dakota alleging that DSS, CPS, the State's Attorney, and the presiding judge of the state's Seventh Circuit court violated the ICWA and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiffs were originally granted injunctive and declaratory relief, but the Eighth Circuit vacated those orders and remanded the case. Following that decision, the defendants' motion to dismiss was granted, and judgment was entered in favor of the defendants.
View Case Detail (CW-SD-0001)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 11, 2021
Newsome v. Philadelphia
Case Category: Equal Employment
Trial Docket: 2:19-cv-05590-MMB (E.D. Pa.)
EE-PA-0253
This is a case about the Philadelphia Police Department (PPD) failing to provide accommodations for nursing employees. On November 26, 2019, a female PPD employee filed this putative class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The plaintiff sued the City of Philadelphia under the Fair Labor Standards Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Represented by private counsel, the plaintiff sought injunctive and declaratory relief, damages, and attorneys' fees. The plaintiff claimed that the PPD had failed to provide nursing female police officers with appropriate accommodations, engaged in sex and pregnancy discrimination, and violated the First Amendment right to petition. On November 12, 2020, court granted a motion to dismiss for six of the eight counts, holding that the plaintiff did not have enough of a factual basis to allege claims of retaliation, a hostile work environment, or § 1983 disparate treatment. In addition, the First Amendment protection did not apply. The plaintiff filed an amended complaint on December 12, 2020, which the defendant has moved to dismiss. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (EE-PA-0253)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 11, 2021
Alaska Libertarian Party v. Fenumiai
Case Category: Election/Voting Rights
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-00127 (D. Alaska)
VR-AK-0012
This action was filed 2020 Presidential Election cycle by the Alaska Libertarian Party against the Director of Elections in the District Court for the District of Alaska. The plaintiffs alleged that the signature requirements to gain access to the ballot violated their First and Fourteenth Amendment Rights. On July 13, 2020, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the case.
View Case Detail (VR-AK-0012)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 10, 2021
Weikert v. Elder
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-03646 (D. Colo.)
JC-CO-0012
In December 2020, six detainees in the El Paso County Jail in Colorado filed this putative class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. The plaintiffs alleged that the jail's lack of measures to mitigate the risks of COVID-19 amounted to a violation of the Due Process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment and cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The Court granted a stipulated preliminary injunction on January 4, 2021. The case is ongoing as of January 20, 2021.
View Case Detail (JC-CO-0012)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 10, 2021
Sadat v. Trump
Case Category: Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority
Trial Docket: 3:21-cv-00416 (N.D. Cal.)
PR-CA-0007
In 2021, the ACLU and private counsel brought this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in response to President Trump’s June 11, 2020 Executive Order authorizing economic sanctions against individuals who assist the International Criminal Court in investigating or prosecuting war crimes. The plaintiffs sued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and §706 of the Administrative Procedure Act. They sought declaratory relief and an injunction that would prevent the Trump Administration from implementing or enforcing the Executive Order. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (PR-CA-0007)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 10, 2021
United States v. Daher
Case Category: National Security
Trial Docket: 2:18-cr-20559-NGE-MKM (E.D. Mich.)
NS-MI-0006
This is a federal criminal case about SNAP fraud where the U.S. government moved to introduce evidence obtained using a FISA warrant. In 2018, the two defendants in this case were charged with multiple counts of wire fraud in connection with a scheme to defraud the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. One defendant pleaded guilty before filing any pretrial motions, but the other litigated the use of FISA evidence in a domestic criminal case. The court refused to dismiss the case due to the introduction of FISA evidence. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (NS-MI-0006)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 9, 2021
Harper v. Cuomo
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 9:21-cv-00019 (N.D.N.Y.)
PC-NY-0081
This putative class action was filed on June 16, 2020 by medically vulnerable prisoners in New York's Adirondack Correctional Facility. The plaintiffs sought extra protections from COVID-19. A magistrate judge denied the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction on March 1, 2021.
View Case Detail (PC-NY-0081)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 9, 2021
Belton, Jr. v. East Baton Rouge Parish Prison
Case Category: Jail Conditions
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-00278 (M.D. La.)
JC-LA-0030
Incarcerated persons in the East Baton Rouge Parish Prison filed this action in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, requesting the release of medically vulnerable inmates, as well as mitigation measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in the facility. The court denied to enter a temporary restraining order on July 3 and on February 4, 2021 the court granted the defendants' motions to dismiss.
View Case Detail (JC-LA-0030)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 8, 2021
Brunson v. Board of Trustees of Clarendon County
Case Category: School Desegregation
Trial Docket: 7210 (D.S.C.)
SD-SC-0005
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (SD-SC-0005)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 7, 2021
Portland v. Barr
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-07184 (N.D. Cal.)
PN-CA-0051
On October 14, 2020, the cities of Portland, OR and Oakland, CA sued the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice alleging that the federal government violated the Administrative Procedure Act by setting federal law enforcement policy in excess of statutory authority and deploying federal law enforcement agents outside of their jurisdiction during "Operation Diligent Valor" in response to the 2020 racial justice protests. They further alleged that Chad Wolf was not legally authorized to perform the duties and functions of the Secretary of Homeland Security. Finally, the suit alleged that the federal government violated the Tenth Amendment by commandeering the Portland Police Bureau. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief. As of March 7, 2021, the case remains pending before the District Court.
View Case Detail (PN-CA-0051)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 5, 2021
Doe v. Johnson [later Kelly, Nielsen]
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 4:15-cv-00250-DCB (D. Ariz.)
IM-AZ-0021
On June 8, 2015, civil detainees confined in the Tucson Sector of the U.S. Border Patrol filed a class action lawsuit, alleging violations of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the APA due to inhumane and punitive conditions while they were detained in holding cells. The district court granted a PI mandating that defendants must maintain conditions of confinement adequate for the detainees' physical needs and provide detainees with mats and blankets after 12 hours. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the PI order. In 2018 the plaintiffs filed a motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of defendants' obligation to provide raised beds for detainees held for any period requiring sleep; the district court denied this motion. After a 7-day trial in January 2020, the district court held that these extended confinement conditions violated the Constitution and issued an order enjoining the defendants from holding detainees for longer than 48 unless they provided conditions of confinement that meet basic human needs. This permanent injunction was ordered and has been in effect since April 2020.
View Case Detail (IM-AZ-0021)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 5, 2021
National Immigrant Justice Center v. Executive Office for Immigration Review
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:21-cv-00056 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0094
In December 2020, the Trump Administration published a new rule, which would impose procedural barriers for individuals seeking asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). On January 8, 2021, four immigration legal service providers—the National Immigrant Justice Center, Immigrant Defenders Law Center, Florence Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project, and Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center—filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for District of Columbia. The plaintiffs sued the Executive Office for Immigration Review under the Administrative Procedure Act, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and the Fifth Amendment. The plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as attorneys' fees, claiming that the rule was issued without statutory authority, was contrary to the Immigration and Nationality Act, and violated the procedural due process rights of refugees. They also claimed that EOIR failed to undertake and publish a final regulatory flexibility analysis, as required under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. On January 14, 2021, the court granted a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction, and a stay of the rule's effective date. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0094)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 5, 2021
E.A.R.R. v. Department of Homeland Security
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-02146 (S.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0171
On November 2, 2020 asylum seekers with disabilities and health conditions filed a putative class-action suit against the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Customs and Border Protection in the Southern District of California. The plaintiffs alleged that defendant's violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. The plaintiffs requested a preliminary injunction and an order enjoining defendants from subjecting members of the putative class to removal protocols and attorney's fees. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0171)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 5, 2021
Electronic Privacy Information Center v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-00797-CKK (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0047
On April 9, 2018, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) filed this complaint against defendant U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). EPIC alleged that ICE had failed to timely respond to its FOIA request for records concerning "ICE’s purchase and use of mobile forensics devices and technology." EPIC sought injunctive relief under FOIA so as to have the responsive records released. ICE began producing documents in July 2018, and the parties continued to work out issues with the productions without court intervention through 2018 and 2019. In February 2020, the parties notified the court that they had resolved all outstanding issues with the document production. They then settled attorneys' fees and costs and stipulated to dismissal on June 23, 2020. This case is closed.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0047)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 4, 2021
Disability Rights California v. County of Alameda
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-05256 (N.D. Cal.)
DR-CA-0061
On July 30, 2020, Disability Rights California brought a suit against Alameda County in the Northern District Court of California. Disability Rights California alleged that Alameda County had discriminated against residents with serious mental health disabilities by institutionalizing and segregating them instead of providing adequate treatment and services. On January 21, 2021, the Court granted Alameda County’s motion to dismiss with leave to amend and denied their motion to strike. Disability Rights California has filed an amended complaint as of February 23, 2021.
View Case Detail (DR-CA-0061)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 4, 2021
Romero v. Mount Prospect
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:00-cv-0861 (N.D. Ill.)
PN-IL-0024
This case is about racial profiling by police officers in Illinois. On February 11, 2000, three Hispanic motorists filed a complaint against the Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois (the Village), the Mount Prospect Police Department (MPPD), the Chief of Police, and several individual officers. The plaintiffs sought class certification. We don't have access to the filings and, as such, do not have any further information about the cause of action or specific allegations by the plaintiffs. The hearing on the final approval of the class action settlement was held on February 11, 2003. A judgment was entered granting the settlement, which terminated the case.
View Case Detail (PN-IL-0024)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 3, 2021
Moreno v. Nielsen
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-01135 (E.D.N.Y.)
IM-NY-0062
On Feb. 22, 2018, four noncitizens, on behalf of a proposed class of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) recipients, filed this lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its component U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). Represented by the American Immigration Council and the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, the plaintiffs filed their complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, challenging the defendants' denial of their applications for lawful permanent resident (LPR) status.
View Case Detail (IM-NY-0062)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 3, 2021
Umarbaev v. Moore
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-01279 (N.D. Tex.)
IM-TX-0056
In May 2020, eleven immigration detainees at high risk for COVID-19 or who had already tested positive for COVID-19 filed this lawsuit, seeking writs of habeas corpus, declaratory, injunctive relief, and a temporary restraining order. They alleged that the conditions of their confinement violated their Fifth Amendment rights to due process. Judge Boyle denied the plaintiffs' request for release on June 6, 2020 and dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, stating that conditions of confinement claims could not be brought under habeas. The plaintiffs filed an appeal, but later voluntarily dismissed it and the case is now believed to be closed. The judge denied their request for temporary restraining order motion, indicating that habeas relief was limited to unlawful detention rather than confinement conditions. The plaintiffs then filed an interlocutory appeal to the Fifth Circuit Court in July 2020, which they moved to dismiss in January 2021. This case is believed to be closed.
View Case Detail (IM-TX-0056)


CASE ADDITIONS
March 3, 2021
Clark v. City of New York
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:18-cv-02334 (S.D.N.Y.)
PN-NY-0052
On March 16, 2018, the nonprofit Turning Point for Women and Families and individuals who were forced to remove their religious head coverings for post-arrest photographs while in the custody of the New York Police Department filed this class-action lawsuit in the Southern District of New York. The plaintiffs sued the City of New York under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), § 1983 for violations of plaintiffs’ right to freely exercise their religion under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and New York state law. The plaintiffs, represented by Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady LLP and the Council for American-Islamic Relations New York Inc., sought injunctive relief against the challenged policy, an order stipulating the adoption of non-discriminatory post-arrest photography policy, declaratory judgment, compensatory and punitive damages and attorney’s fees. On November 5, 2020, a settlement agreement was reached resolving the claim for injunctive relief. The monetary claims are still pending. The plaintiffs also asked the court to certify the class as all individuals who were forced to remove their religious head coverings for post-arrest photographs while in NYPD custody, this motion was granted on February 16, 2021.
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0052)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 28, 2021
Disability Rights Montana v. Opper
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 2:14-cv-00025-SEH (D. Mont.)
PC-MT-0008
Disability Rights Montana filed this lawsuit against the Montana Department of Corrections, the Montana State Prison, the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services, and the Montana State Hospital, in the United States District Court for the District of Montana. The plaintiff alleged that the Prison and the Department of Corrections were violating the Eighth Amendment rights of seriously mentally ill prisoners by, among other things, putting prisoners with serious mental illnesses in solitary confinement. As for the hospital and the DPHHS, the plaintiff alleged that both were violating the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Due Process rights of prisoners who had been sentenced as "guilty but mentally ill" (GBMI) by transferring them from the hospital to the state prison. This second claim was eventually dropped by the plaintiffs in a stipulated dismissal and the claims against the prison and the Department of Corrections were refiled under a different case number (available on the Clearinghouse under PC-MT-0010).
View Case Detail (PC-MT-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 28, 2021
Disability Rights Montana v. Batista
Case Category: Prison Conditions
Trial Docket: 2:15-cv-00022 (D. Mont.)
PC-MT-0010
On May 15, 2015, Disability Rights Montana filed a lawsuit against the Director of the Montana Department of Corrections and the warden of Montana State Prison. Both of these defendants were previous named as defendants in a separate complaint filed in Disability Rights Montana v. Opper (also available on the Clearinghouse). In the amended complaint, plaintiffs alleged that defendants had violated 8th Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishments by subjecting prisoners with serious mental illnesses to solitary confinement for months or even years at a time. The complaint was dismissed. Parties engaged in protracted settlements discussion through February 2018. On July 19, 2019, the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal and reassigned the case to Judge Molloy. The case remains open.
View Case Detail (PC-MT-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 27, 2021
Marimuthu v. Signal International, LLC
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:13-cv-00499 (E.D. Tex.)
IM-TX-0039
On Aug. 7, 2013, 10 Indian guestworkers filed a lawsuit in E.D. Tx. for harm suffered as a result of an allegedly fraudulent and coercive employment recruitment scheme by Defendant Signal International. While discovery was underway, Signal filed for bankruptcy and the Court stayed this case pending bankruptcy and settlement proceedings. Defendant’s bankruptcy terminated February 9, 2019, but the parties continue to coordinate the distribution of the settlement funds.
View Case Detail (IM-TX-0039)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 27, 2021
Make the Road New York v. Pompeo
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:19-cv-11633 (S.D.N.Y.)
IM-NY-0070
In December 2019, individuals facing deportation, their United States citizen relatives, and nonprofit organizations that assist noncitizens sued various U.S. Departments alleging that Trump Administration immigration policies created a wealth test and excluded lawful immigrants from nonwhite countries, leading to the destruction of families, penalization of the use of benefits, and the diversion of resources. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief. They obtained a preliminary nationwide injunction on July 29, 2020. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-NY-0070)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 26, 2021
Committee on Oversight and Reform v. Barr
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:19-cv-03557 (D.D.C.)
IM-DC-0086
In 2019, the House Oversight and Reform Committee filed this lawsuit in the District Court for the District of Columbia against the Attorney General and Secretary of Commerce. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants were acting in violation of the Committee's Article I powers by refusing to comply with its subpoenas. These subpoenas were for documents related to the Committee's investigation into the Trump Administration's efforts to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census. The case has been stayed pending pending the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in Committee on the Judiciary of the United House of Representatives v. McGahn (1:19-cv-02379). The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-DC-0086)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 26, 2021
Singleton v. Cannizzaro
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 2:17-cv-10721 (E.D. La.)
CJ-LA-0010
Summary/Abstract not yet on record
View Case Detail (CJ-LA-0010)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 26, 2021
Shakman v. Democratic Organization of Cook County
Case Category: Speech and Religious Freedom
Trial Docket: 1:69-cv-02145 (N.D. Ill.)
FA-IL-0008
In October 1969, plaintiffs, an independent candidate in the election for delegates to the 1970 Illinois Constitutional Convention and his supporters, filed a class action lawsuit against the Democratic Organization of Cook County, the City of Chicago, and various government officers at the state and local levels claiming that the extensive patronage system of Chicago politics violated their constitutional rights. Litigation was heavily complicated by procedural and standing issues, though it gave way to consent decrees prohibiting the patronage system. As of February 26, 2021, the State of Illinois has attempted to vacate the consent agreements, claiming that it is substantially compliant with the agreements' requirements.
View Case Detail (FA-IL-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 24, 2021
Brennan Center for Justice v. U.S. Department of State
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 1:17-cv-07520-JGK (S.D.N.Y.)
IM-NY-0056
On Oct. 2, 2017, the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law sued DOS under FOIA, seeking information about Trump's "extreme vetting practices" including the Administration's Mar. 6, 2017 EO and Sept. 24, 2017 Proclamation restricting entry of persons into the US. The Court granted partial summary judgment to the plaintiffs on March 29, 2019. It also ordered the defendants to provide the court with copies of five documents in question for in camera review on the applicability of the presidential communication privilege. The court continues to review the documents to determine and to what extent privilege applies. On July 30, 2020, the plaintiffs requested the court to act expeditiously and as soon as possible given the great public interest in the subject matter of the suit. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-NY-0056)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 23, 2021
Ryan v. Smith
Case Category: Criminal Justice (Other)
Trial Docket: 3:20-cv-00843-SDD-SDJ (M.D. La.)
CJ-LA-0014
In December 2020, four individuals at East Baton Rouge Parish Prison (EBRPP) filed this class action lawsuit alleging violations of their Fourteenth and Sixth Amendment rights by judicial and prison officials. On December 15, the plaintiffs filed a motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. The request for a temporary restraining order was later withdrawn in January 2021. A settlement conference is scheduled for March 11 and the deadline for the parties to file a joint status report is March 21. The defendants' responsive pleading to the complaint is due on March 22, 2021. This case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (CJ-LA-0014)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 23, 2021
National Association of the Deaf v. Trump
Case Category: Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Trial Docket: 1:20-cv-02107 (D.D.C.)
DR-DC-0008
On August 3, 2020, the National Association for the Deaf and five deaf plaintiffs who use ASL as their primary language sued President Donald Trump and other White House officials for injunctive and declaratory relief. The plaintiffs alleged that the Defendants' failure to provide in-frame ASL interpretation at White House Coronavirus Briefings violated their rights under the Rehabilitation Act and the First Amendment. The plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction, which Judge James E. Boasberg granted on September 9, 2020. Under the preliminary injunction, the defendants are required to provide in-frame interpretation at all White House Coronavirus Briefings, either in the form of live ASL interpretation from the location of the briefing or live interpretation from a remote location in picture-in-picture format. The Defendants appealed the district court's order granting the preliminary injunction to the DC Circuit. The case is currently stayed in district court pending the resolution of the appeal.
View Case Detail (DR-DC-0008)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 22, 2021
R.P.-K. v. Hawaii Department of Education
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 1:10-cv-00436-SOM-KSC (D. Haw.)
ED-HI-0003
In this class action suit, four students with disabilities and the Hawaii Disability Rights Center sued the Hawaii Department of Education for allegedly violating the IDEA, ADA, and the Rehabilitation Act. After seven years of litigation, Judge Oki Mollway approved the settlement for class members. Under the settlement agreement, the Department of Education agreed to pay $8.2 million dollars to class members, $1.5 million for attorneys' fees, and up to $250,000 for class counsel for future services. The administration of the settlement continues.
View Case Detail (ED-HI-0003)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 21, 2021
Wetzel v. Glen St. Andrew Living Community, LLC
Case Category: Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Trial Docket: 1:16-cv-07598 (N.D. Ill.)
FH-IL-0019
On July 27th, 2016, plaintiff Marsha Wetzel brought a civil right action under the Fair Housing Act and the Illinois Human Rights Act in the Northern District Court of Illinois. Plaintiff, a 68-year-old lesbian, sought for declaratory, injunctive, and compensatory and punitive damages against Defendants Glen St. Andrew Living Community (GSALC) and their administrators. Plaintiff alleged that throughout most of her time at GSALC, Marsha has been subjected to a pattern of discrimination and harassment from other residents because of her sexual orientation, including persistent verbal harassment, threats and three separate assaults resulting in visible injuries. She further alleged that although she repeatedly complained about the sexual orientation-based harassment to GSALC staff, they gave no response. Instead, it was alleged that staffs marginalized and alienated Marsha and retaliated against her for complaining about the harassment.
View Case Detail (FH-IL-0019)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 20, 2021
City and County of San Francisco v. Sessions
Case Category: Immigration and/or the Border
Trial Docket: 3:17-cv-04642-WHO (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0093
The City and County of San Francisco sued DOJ on Aug. 11, 2017 over policies targeting "sanctuary cities" by imposing immigration enforcement conditions on federal funding for law enforcement. The U.S. District Ct. for the District of Northern California granted summary judgment for San Francisco, entering a nationwide injunction. DOJ appealed to the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court but limited the scope of the injunction to just California. The government filed a petition for review with the Supreme Court in November 2020. In January 2021, President Joesph Biden took office and the government filed a letter with the Supreme Court recommending it hold the petition in abeyance until it could determine the administration's position on these issues. The case is ongoing.
View Case Detail (IM-CA-0093)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 19, 2021
Gordon v. Jordan School District
Case Category: Education
Trial Docket: 2:17-cv-00677 (D. Utah)
ED-UT-0002
Parents of students across three Utah school districts allege sex discrimination because of disparities in opportunities between male and female athletics. Suing on behalf of a class of similarly situated parties, the parents seek injunctive relief and equal availability of sports like girls' football.
View Case Detail (ED-UT-0002)


CASE ADDITIONS
February 19, 2021
People of New York v. New York
Case Category: Policing
Trial Docket: 1:21-cv-00322 (S.D.N.Y.)
PN-NY-0054
New York Attorney General Letitia James filed this lawsuit against the NYPD on behalf of New York residents on January 14, 2021. The suit alleged that the NYPD regularly falsely arrested and used excessive force against peaceful protesters during the 2020 racial justice protests in violation of the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments. It also alleged violations of the New York State Constitution and state law, including instances of assault, battery, and false arrest and imprisonment by NYPD officers. The suit sought declaratory and injunctive relief requiring the NYPD cease unconstitutional policing practices and change its existing policies and training practices. As of March 7, 2021, the case is ongoing before the District Court.
View Case Detail (PN-NY-0054)