Source: https://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=9560
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 10:12:58+00:00

Document:
On March 18, 1992, this action was brought by various organizations and Haitian aliens in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, challenging procedures of the Coast Guard interdiction program with respect to Haitian refugees. Under the program, Haitians that fled their country were apprehended by the Coast Guard and detained on board Coast Guard cutters and at Guantánamo Bay. The INS interviewed the Haitian refugees and those found to have a "credible" fear of persecution were designated "screened in" and were eligible for transfer to the United States to pursue asylum claims. Those individuals found not to have a credible fear were "screened out" and were returned to Haiti. Plaintiffs claimed that under the program, Members of the Haitian Service Organizations, which attempted to render "legal counsel, advocacy, and representation," were denied access to the detained Haitians in violation of the First Amendment. Plaintiffs further claimed that the program violated federal immigration statutes, the Fifth Amendment, the APA, certain treaties and international agreements and executive directives.
A similar case, Haitian Refugee Center v. Baker, had been filed in the District of Columbia. See IM-DC-6 of this collection.
The District Court (Judge Sterling Johnson, Jr.) granted a preliminary injunction prohibiting the government from denying the Haitian Service Organizations immediate access to any member of the class of screened in plaintiffs. Haitian Centers Council, Inc. v. McNary, 1992 WL 155853 (E.D.N.Y. Apr 06, 1992). The government appealed. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit modified and affirmed. Haitian Centers Council, Inc. v. McNary, 969 F.2d 1326 (2nd Cir.1992).
Subsequently, on May 24, 1992, the President issued an Executive Order under which any Haitian interdicted beyond the territorial waters of the United States was to be returned directly to Haiti without being afforded the opportunity to undergo INS refugee screening. Plaintiffs moved for a TRO and preliminary injunction to prevent enforcement of the Executive Order, alleging that it violated § 243(h)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 and Article 33 of the United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. The District Court denied plaintiffs' motion for a TRO to prevent the government from returning interdicted Haitians. Haitian Centers Council, Inc. v. McNary, 1992 WL 155853 (E.D.N.Y. June 5 1992). The plaintiffs appealed and the Court of Appeals reversed. Haitian Centers Council, Inc. v. McNary, 969 F.2d 1350 (2nd Cir. 1992) Certiorari was granted.
The Supreme Court (Justice Stevens) reversed the Court of Appeals, holding that neither § 243(h) nor Article 33 limited the President's power to issue an Executive Order directing the Coast Guard to repatriate undocumented aliens intercepted on the high seas. Sale v. Haitian Centers Council, Inc., 509 U.S. 155, 113 S.Ct. 2549, 125 L.Ed.2d 128(1993), see also Sale v. Haitian Centers Council, Inc., 509 U.S. 918, 113 S.Ct. 3028, 125 L.Ed.2d 716 (1993).
On remand, parties settled the case. A joint motion for preliminary approval of the Settlement Agreement and for approval of the class notice was filed on January 20, 1994. Following a fairness hearing on February 23, 1994, the Court approved the Settlement Agreement. Terms of the settlement are unknown.
The Oyez Project, Sale, Acting Commissioner, Immigration And Naturalization Service v. Haitian Centers Council, Inc., 509 U.S. 155 (1993).
The Oyez Project, McNary v. Haitian Refugee Center., Inc., 498 U.S. 479 (1991).

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 243
 v. 
 v. 
 § 243
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.