1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

CENTRO DE TRABAJADORES UNIDOS,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND 

CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Centro de Trabajadores Unidos (CTU) brings this complaint for injunctive relief, and 

states as follows in support thereof:

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

1. The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552 et seq., “was enacted to

promote transparency and accountability in how the federal government discharges its numerous 

and far-ranging responsibilities.” Shapiro v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 153 F. Supp. 3d 253, 256 

(D.D.C. 2016). FOIA provides a means for the public to access government documents and 

“mandates that an agency disclose records upon request, unless they fall within one of nine 

exemptions.” Id. at 257. FOIA also recognizes that the government cannot sit on its hands 

forever; it must make timely determinations regarding what documents it possesses that are 

responsive to a specific request, and when it will produce them. See 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A)(i).

2. Defendant United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) enforces 

the United States’ immigration laws. These operations include auditing businesses regarding 

whether they have verified the identity and employment eligibility of employees and documented

Case: 1:20-cv-02300 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/13/20 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:1
2

that information using the federal Employment Eligibility Verification Form I-9. In a two-wave 

operation in 2018, ICE delivered more than 5,200 I-9 audit notices to businesses across the 

United States.

3. Plaintiff Centro de Trabajadores Unidos works with immigrant laborers in the

Chicago area, and submitted a FOIA request to understand how ICE’s operations affect its 

constituents. These records are important for Plaintiff and other organizations in the Chicago 

area that work with immigrants to understand how their constituencies may be affected by ICE’s 

audits.

4. ICE has not made a determination on CTU’s FOIA request within the statutorily 

mandated 20 working days for such determination (30 days with extension taken by ICE). 5 

U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A)(i); 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A)(ii). As a result, ICE is impeding CTU’s access 

to these important records. 

5. Administrative remedies under FOIA are deemed exhausted when an agency fails 

to comply with the statute’s applicable time limits for making a determination on a given request. 

5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(C)(i). Having fully exhausted applicable administrative remedies for its 

request, CTU now turns to this Court to enforce FOIA’s guarantee of public access to agency 

records. Accordingly, CTU asks this Court to declare that ICE has violated FOIA, to order ICE 

to provide CTU with the documents responsive to its request, and to grant other appropriate 

relief, including attorney’s fees and costs.

PARTIES

6. Plaintiff Centro de Trabajadores Unidos (CTU) is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit 

organization. It is an immigrant-run organization on the Southeast Side of Chicago that educates 

workers on their rights, develops leadership within the immigrant community, supports and 

Case: 1:20-cv-02300 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/13/20 Page 2 of 8 PageID #:2
3

organizes all workers as they fight for their rights in the workplace, and fights for changing 

policy that increases standards for all workers.

7. Defendant United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is an 

agency of the United States Government within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. § 552(f)(1) and 5 

U.S.C. § 552a(a)(1). ICE is headquartered at 500 12th St., SW, Washington, D.C. 20536.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

8. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 

1361 and 5 U.S.C. §§ 552(a)(4)(A)(vii) and (4)(B) and 5 U.S.C. §§ 701–06.

9. Venue lies in this district under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B) and 28 U.S.C. § 

1391(e)(1)(c) as Plaintiff CTU resides and has its primary place of business in the Northern 

District of Illinois, and no real property is involved in this action.

LEGAL BACKGROUND

10. FOIA “requires the government to disclose, upon request, broad classes of 

documents identified in 5 U.S.C. § 552(a),” unless the documents are exempt under 5 U.S.C. § 

552(b). See Prison Legal News v. Samuels, 787 F.3d 1142, 1146 (D.C. Cir. 2015).

11. FOIA imposes strict deadlines on federal agencies when they receive a request for 

records pursuant to FOIA. First, an agency must acknowledge receipt of a FOIA request, in 

writing, within ten days of receipt of the request, exclusive of weekends and legal public 

holidays. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(7)(A).

12. Next, an agency must respond to a party making a FOIA request within twenty 

days of receipt, exclusive of weekends and legal public holidays, notifying that party of the 

agency’s determination whether to fulfill the request and of the requester’s right to appeal the 

agency’s determination to the agency head. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A)(i). The D.C. Circuit has 

Case: 1:20-cv-02300 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/13/20 Page 3 of 8 PageID #:3
4

explained that to make a valid “determination” under the statute the agency must indicate “the 

scope of the documents it will produce and the exemptions it will claim with respect to any 

withheld documents.” Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Wash. v. FEC, 711 F.3d 180, 185-

86. 188 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (CREW); see also Seavey v. Dep’t of Justice, 266 F. Supp. 3d 241, 245 

(D.D.C. 2017) (the agency must “(1) gather[] and review[] the [requested] documents; (2) 

determin[e] and communicat[e] the scope of the documents it intends to produce and withhold,

and the reasons for withholding any documents; and (3) inform[] the requester that it can appeal

whatever portion of the ‘determination’ is adverse”).

13. The agency may extend the statutory twenty-day deadline only in “unusual 

circumstances,” 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(B)(iii), and must then make the requested records 

“promptly” available, id. § 552(a)(3)(A), (a)(6)(C)(i), except where it can establish that one of 

FOIA’s narrow exemptions listed at § 552(b) applies.

14. When an agency fails to make a timely determination with respect to a perfected 

FOIA request, a requester is deemed to have exhausted administrative remedies with respect to 

the request and may immediately file suit in district court. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(C); CREW, 711 

F.3d at 186.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

15. On October 11, 2019, CTU submitted its Freedom of Information Act request to 

ICE, through counsel by email. CTU’s request sought documents relating to I-9 audits in Illinois 

and policy and operational documents related to such audits in Illinois and generally. Exhibit A, 

FOIA request.

16. ICE acknowledged receipt of this request on November 6, 2019; claimed that the 

request was not received until November 6, 2019; and sought a 10-day extension of the time 

Case: 1:20-cv-02300 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/13/20 Page 4 of 8 PageID #:4
5

period to respond to the request. ICE also indicated its intent to charge commercial requester 

copying rates and misidentified the requester as CTU’s attorney, not CTU. Exhibit B, ICE 

response. 

17. On November 8, 2019, CTU responded to ICE’s email through counsel, clarifying 

that CTU is the requester, that CTU is not a commercial requester, and that a fee waiver should 

be granted. Exhibit C, CTU response.

18. On November 12, 2019, ICE sent a request for clarification, asking CTU to 

narrow the date range as to investigatory documents and specify the kinds of PowerPoint 

documents sought. Exhibit D, ICE clarification request.

19. On November 12, 2019, CTU responded to ICE’s request for clarification, 

narrowing the date range as to investigatory documents and specifying the kinds of PowerPoint 

documents sought. Exhibit E, CTU clarification response.

20. On January 2, 2020, CTU, through counsel, emailed ICE noting that the response 

deadline had passed and that CTU would litigate to obtain the requested documents if necessary. 

Exhibit F, CTU demand.

21. On January 8, 2020, ICE responded to note that ICE had received CTU’s 

clarification on November 12, 2019, and that ICE was waiting for a response from its offices 

regarding the requested documents. Exhibit G, ICE response to CTU demand.

22. Even accepting ICE’s receipt date of November 6, 2019, ICE’s deadline to 

produce responsive documents under FOIA (30 working days, including ICE’s 10-day extension) 

expired on December 20, 2019.

23. As of the date of this filing, ICE has not made a determination within the meaning 

of FOIA on CTU’s FOIA request.

Case: 1:20-cv-02300 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/13/20 Page 5 of 8 PageID #:5
6

24. Because ICE has not issued a determination within the statutorily mandated 

timeframe, CTU is deemed to have exhausted its administrative remedies. 5 U.S.C. § 

552(a)(6)(C); CREW, 711 F.3d at 186.

PLAINTIFF’S ENTITLEMENT TO A FEE WAIVER

25. Plaintiff CTU is entitled to a waiver of document search, review, and duplication 

fees because disclosure of these records is likely to contribute significantly to a public 

understanding of the operations or activities of the government and is not primarily in the 

commercial interest of CTU. See 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(iii); 6 C.F.R. § 5.11(k); 28 C.F.R. § 

16.10(k).

26. CTU’s FOIA request addresses the policies, practices, methods, and outcomes of 

Defendant’s I-9 audit program, particularly in Chicago and Illinois. This program affects the 

rights of Latnix-Americans and concerned citizens in Chicago, Illinois, and beyond. At present, 

ICE has not revealed information about how it chooses I-9 audit targets and whether such audits 

discriminate against immigrants from certain nationalities or ethnic origins. Researchers have 

identified a history of racial discrimination in ICE’s enforcement operations. See Bill Ong Hing, 

Institutional Racism, ICE Raids, and Immigration Reform, 44 U.S.F. L. Rev. 307 308, (“The 

inherent racism at the center of the ICE raids and other ICE and Border Patrol operations raises 

further concern that receives little public attention. With few exceptions, the ICE operations 

targeted Latinos—usually Mexicans.”) Chicagoans do not know which businesses are targeted 

for ICE audits, how investigations are conducted, or the extent of racialized enforcement 

practices engaged in by ICE. Such information is of significant and urgent value to the public, 

and particularly to Latinx and immigrant workers and community members. Without the release 

Case: 1:20-cv-02300 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/13/20 Page 6 of 8 PageID #:6
7

of the records sought in Plaintiff’s FOIA Request, the public cannot assess the extent of bias or 

discrimination in ICE’s operations.

27. Frequent articles and media coverage reveal strong and sustained public interest 

ICE enforcement operations. Given the lack of publicly available information about the I-9 audit 

program, the public interest in such information, and criticisms that ICE discriminates against 

Latinx residents, the records sought in Plaintiff’s FOIA request will significantly contribute to 

the public’s understanding of the government’s I-9 audit programs.

28. The disclosures sought by CTU are not in their commercial interest. CTU is a notfor-profit organization and will use the records sought to educate and inform the public.

CLAIM FOR RELIEF – FAILURE TO PRODUCE RECORDS

29. Plaintiff repeats and incorporates every above allegation in full. 

30. Defendants’ failure to timely notify Plaintiff whether it will comply with 

Plaintiff’s FOIA request violated Plaintiff’s rights to records under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A) and 

5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(3)(A) and Defendants’ corresponding regulations.

31. Defendants’ failure to release responsive, non-exempt records violated Plaintiff’s 

right to those records under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(3)(A) and Defendants’ corresponding regulations.

32. Defendants’ failure to make a reasonable search for responsive records violated 

Plaintiffs’ rights under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(3)(C) and Defendant’s corresponding regulations.

REQUESTED RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff CTU respectfully requests that this court:

1. Order Defendants to conduct a reasonable search for records responsive to Plaintiff’s 

FOIA request;

2. Order Defendants to disclose and release the requested records in their entireties;

Case: 1:20-cv-02300 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/13/20 Page 7 of 8 PageID #:7
8

3. Order Defendants to grant a full fee waiver to Plaintiff;

4. Provide for expeditious proceedings in this action;

5. Award Plaintiff costs and reasonable attorney’s fees in this action as provided by 5 

U.S.C. § 552(a); and,

6. Grant any other and further relief the Court deems appropriate.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Matthew V. Topic

Wallace Hilke

IL Bar #: 6329814

Beyond Legal Aid

17 N. State St. Suite 1380

Chicago, IL 60602

Tel: (312) 973-7308

Fax: (312) 999-0076 

E-mail: whilke@beyondlegalaid.org

Matthew Topic

IL Bar #: 6290922

LOEVY & LOEVY

311 North Aberdeen, 3rd Floor

Chicago, IL 60607

312-243-5900

foia@loevy.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Case: 1:20-cv-02300 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/13/20 Page 8 of 8 PageID #:8