Support Article

How To Search Guide
Search for:
clear search

Docket Number

Key Dates

Filing Date

Settlement / Judgment Date

Terminating Date

Plaintiffs

Defendants

Case Details

Outcome

Issues

MORE▾

Document Details

Document Filing Date

MORE▾

Document Citation (Choose One)

Use this for most court reporters

S.Ct. reporter and WL only

LEXIS and L.Ed. only

Search for:

Support Article

How To Search Guide
20 cases, 264 documents
Ordered by
IMMIGRATION AND/OR THE BORDER
American Immigration Lawyers Association v. Reno

1:97-cv-00597 | U.S. District Court for the District of District of Columbia

Filed Date: March 27, 1997

Closed Date: Aug. 20, 1998

In 1998, three lawsuits were filed by immigration assistance organizations and individual aliens against federal immigration agencies and officials in the District Court of the District of Columbia. These suits challenged the summary removal provisions of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 and its implementing regulations. The Act established a system for expediting the removal of aliens who arrived at the border but were not eligible for admission. The l…
IMMIGRATION AND/OR THE BORDER
Barahona-Gomez v. Reno

4:97-cv-00895 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Filed Date: March 14, 1997

Closed Date: 2006

On March 14, 1997, the National Immigration Law Center, the Lawyers Committee For Civil Rights of San Francisco Bay Area and cooperating counsel filed a class action lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, challenging directives of Executive Office for Immigration Review officials which implemented the Section 309(c) (5) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA). When the IIRIRA took effect on April 1, 1997, it made ali…
IMMIGRATION AND/OR THE BORDER
Catholic Social Services v. Ashcroft

2:86-cv-01343 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California

Filed Date: Nov. 12, 1986

Closed Date: Aug. 29, 2014

On Nov. 12, 1986, Catholic Social Services filed this class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, challenging the Immigration and Naturalization Service's ("INS") interpretation of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 ("IRCA"). This case was one of three "late amnesty cases" filed in the federal courts in California against the INS. The other two case were Zambrano v. INS, S-88-455 EJG (E.D.Cal.) and LULAC v. INS; 2:87-cv-04757-WDK-CW (C.D.C…
IMMIGRATION AND/OR THE BORDER
Arias v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

0:07-cv-01959 | U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota

Filed Date: April 19, 2007

Closed Date: Feb. 2, 2010

On April 19, 2007, a group of Latino plaintiffs filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, challenging a series of raids by immigration agents of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division ("ICE") and local police officials in and around Willmar, Minnesota, between April 10 - 14, 2007. The plaintiffs sued ICE, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”), and various ICE and DHS officials and officers in their official capacity (“United States defendant…
IMMIGRATION AND/OR THE BORDER
American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee v. Ashcroft

2:87-cv-02107 | U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Filed Date: April 3, 1987

Closed Date: 1999

On April 3, 1987, eight resident aliens filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, claiming that the federal government targeted them for deportation because of their affiliation with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a group that the government deemed to be an international terrorist and communist organization. The government had charged all eight plaintiffs under the McCarran Walter Act, which provided for depor…
IMMIGRATION AND/OR THE BORDER
Abraham v. Reno

1:00-cv-01130 | U.S. District Court for the District of District of Columbia

Filed Date: May 19, 2000

Closed Date: 2001

On May 19, 2000, plaintiffs filed suit in the U.S. District Court District of Columbia to compel the INS to issue long-awaited regulations implementing § 343 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) for certain healthcare workers who were waiting to become lawful permanent residents. Plaintiffs were represented by attorneys for the American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) and private counsel.On September 29, 2000, the parties entered into a Settlement Agree…
IMMIGRATION AND/OR THE BORDER
Tefel v. Reno

1:97-cv-00805 | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida

Filed Date: March 28, 1997

Closed Date: 2002

On March 28, 1997, Nicaraguan aliens filed a class-action complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, challenging the federal government's interpretation of the applicability of the "stop-time" rule for determining eligibility for suspension of deportation.Prior to the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 1996, which amended the Immigration and Nationality Act, an alien facing deportation could apply for "suspension of d…
IMMIGRATION AND/OR THE BORDER
Trollinger v. Tyson Foods, Inc.

4:02-cv-00023 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee

Filed Date: April 2, 2002

Closed Date: Oct. 20, 2008

In December 2001, a federal grand jury returned a 36-count indictment against Tyson Foods, Inc., the world's largest poultry processor, and several individuals, charging the defendants with conspiring to smuggle undocumented aliens into the U.S. and employing them at Tyson's chicken processing plants throughout the country. Shortly after the criminal indictment, plaintiffs filed a nationwide class action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee against Tyson and several…
IMMIGRATION AND/OR THE BORDER
Swift & Company v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

2:06-cv-00314 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas

Filed Date: Nov. 28, 2006

Closed Date: Dec. 14, 2006

This lawsuit is one of several cases concerning immigration raids conducted by federal authorities at Swift meat packing plants throughout the country. [See Valenzuela v. Swift Beef Company, Inc. IM-TX-19; United Food and Commercial Workers Int'l Union v. Chertoff, IM-TX-23; Yarrito v. Meyers, IM-CO-8].Beginning in 2006, federal immigration officials with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division of the Department of Homeland Security commenced an investigation into the hiring pra…

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief

Swift & Company v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the Department of Homeland Security

Nov. 28, 2006

Appendix to Defendants' Memorandum Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction

Swift & Company v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the Department of Homeland Security

Dec. 4, 2006

Defendants' Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction

Swift & Company v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the Department of Homeland Security

Dec. 4, 2006

Order

Swift & Company v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the Department of Homeland Security

Dec. 7, 2006

Stipulation of Dismissal

Swift & Company v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the Department of Homeland Security

Dec. 14, 2006

see 6 additional documents
IMMIGRATION AND/OR THE BORDER
Dent v. Sessions

2:10-cv-02673 | U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona

Filed Date: Dec. 14, 2010

Closed Date: April 1, 2019

On June 26, 2009, a Lawful Permanent Resident detained by the Department of Homeland Security ("DHS") filed this lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The plaintiff, represented by private counsel, sought review under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") affirming his removal order. The plaintiff argued that the order was wrong as a matter of law and violated his constitutional rights.Specifically, the plaintiff claimed that the adminis…