Source: https://www.nwirp.org/our-work/impact-litigation/
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 14:37:48+00:00

Document:
When laws and policies are unjust, we work for systemic change. During the last decade, we have positively affected many important cases with implications for national immigration laws. Our impact litigation work has helped fight racial profiling by border patrol officials in the Olympic Peninsula, secured the right to an attorney for mentally ill immigrants facing deportation, and ensured that immigrants are considered for conditional parole from detention when they qualify.
To respond to the growth of immigration appeals at the Federal and Ninth District Courts, we increased our focus in this area by establishing a new legal unit in 2005. At any one time, the Impact Litigation Unit has several cases pending before the federal courts. NWIRP was invited by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to speak at a roundtable discussion on how to deal with the Circuit's large volume of immigration cases.
Class action on behalf of petitioners for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) challenging USCIS's new and unlawful policy of denying SIJS for youth who obtained the necessary state court orders after they turned 18. The new policy violates the controlling statute by refusing to honor state court SIJS orders issued to youth after they turned 18 but before they turned 21. The Immigration and Nationality Act makes clear that any unmarried youth under 21 years of age is eligible to apply for SIJS if a state court makes findings that the youth is unable to be reunited with one or both parents because they have been abandoned, abused, or neglected, and that it is not in the youth's best interest to return to their country of origin.
In March of 2019, the court granted nationwide class certification for both the credible fear interview class and the bond hearing class, and in April, the court granted plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction.
Individual § 1983 claim seeking damages, declaratory relief, and injunctive relief against Tukwila Police Department for actions taken against him and their policies and practices countenancing such actions: namely, seizing him—the victim of a crime who sought police assistance—in order to investigate his immigration status, and subsequently extending his seizure in order to communicate with federal immigration enforcement officers and effectuate his transfer to federal immigration custody. Mr. Rodriguez asserts that Defendants have no authority to detain or extend any detention for purposes of investigating immigration status or transferring custody of an individual to federal immigration authorities, and that such actions violate his Fourth Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution.
Petition for writ of habeas corpus and putative class action seeking the provision of individualized custody redetermination (bond) hearings for individuals in withholding-only proceedings who are subject to prolonged detention in the Western District of Washington.
Order granting class certification, adopting report and recommendation.
Defendants have appealed the decision to the Ninth Circuit.
Class action on behalf of recipients of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) who reside in Circuit Court jurisdictions where USCIS routinely fails to acknowledge TPS as satisfying the requirement for inspection and admission in order to adjust their status and receive lawful permanent residency. However, the Sixth and Ninth Circuits have held that a TPS holder is considered in “lawful status as a nonimmigrant” and therefore eligible to become a lawful permanent resident (LPR). Class members assert that Defendants’ failure to grant applications for LPR status to TPS holders is in violation of the TPS statute.
Individual § 1983 claim seeking damages and declaratory relief against a Yellowstone County judge and deputy sheriff for unlawfully detaining and arresting plaintiff while he was testifying on behalf of his wife at Yellowstone County Justice Court. Mr. Reynaga asserts both that the Defendant judge overstepped his authority in calling local law enforcement from the Yellowstone County Courthouse, and also that local law enforcement overstepped authority in arresting and detaining Plaintiff without probable cause that he had committed any crime.
Class action on behalf of asylum seekers challenging the federal government’s failure to give them notice of the one-year deadline for filing asylum applications as well as its failure to guarantee them a mechanism through which to abide by that deadline. The district court granted plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and closed the case, requiring the government to adopt a notice of the one-year filing deadline within 90 days. The government is also ordered to provide notice to all class members who have already been released, and to accept as timely any asylum application from a class member filed within one year of the date of adoption of the new notice policy.
Lawsuit against EOIR seeking declaratory and injunctive relief in response to letter from DOJ instructing NWIRP to cease-and-desist providing limited legal services to unrepresented individuals in removal proceedings.
Class action challenging the federal government’s Controlled Application Review and Resolution Program (“CARRP”), an internal vetting program used in evaluating applications before USCIS. Plaintiffs allege the program discriminates against immigrants who are Muslim or from Muslim-majority countries on the basis of their religion and country of origin, and has unlawfully prevented class members from having their applications for adjustment of status and naturalization adjudicated by USCIS.
The parties are currently briefing on discovery disputes.
Class action lawsuit challenging the federal government’s policy and practice of subjecting immigrants to mandatory detention (without the possibility of bond) even though they were not taken directly into immigration custody when released from criminal custody.
Arguments for Nielsen v. Preap were heard before the Supreme Court on October 10, 2018.
FTCA damages action against the Unites States and Bivens claim against an ICE prosecutor who forged documents he submitted to the immigration court in order to deprive the plaintiff of his statutory right to seek a form of immigration relief.
On October 9, 2018 the Ninth Circuit remanded the case back to the district court.
Ninth-circuit-wide class action seeking the recognition that the Constitution and the Immigration and Nationality Act require government-appointed counsel for unrepresented minors in removal proceedings.
Oral arguments for a similar case before the Ninth Circuit, arguing for a categorical right to court-appointed counsel for minors (C.J.L.G. v. Whitaker et al.), were heard en banc on December 10, 2018.
Class action challenge to government’s failure to provide interim employment authorization for asylum applicants and for other applications where USCIS delays in resolving underlying applications.
Order granting in part government’s motion to dismiss based on modified regulations.
Challenge to revocation of DACA in violation of controlling guidelines.
Order denying the motion to dismiss the amended complaint.
Individual lawsuit seeking damages and declaratory/injunctive relief against Yakima County for its unlawful policy and practice of placing immigration holds on individuals in its custody on the basis of ICE administrative warrants, which do not afford the County the requisite legal authority to hold these individuals.
The parties reached a settlement and Yakima County agreed to change its policy related to immigration holds.
Putative class action challenging President Trump’s unlawful suspension of immigrant visa applications via executive order.
Order staying case pending the Supreme Court’s resolution of the appeals in IRAP v. Trump and Hawai‘i v. Trump.
On September 20, 2018, Plaintiffs voluntary moved to dismiss the case without prejudice, and the case was closed on September 21, 2018.
Individual § 1983 claim seeking damages, declaratory, and injunctive relief against Yakima County for failing to release Mr. Olivera after he posted bond, and for Defendants’ unlawful policy and practice of placing immigration holds on individuals in its custody on the basis of ICE administrative warrants, which do not afford the County the requisite legal authority to hold these individuals.
Plaintiff accepted Defendants' offer of judgment and the case is now closed.
Challenge to the government’s authority to detain individuals in withholding-only proceedings without affording them bond hearings.
NWIRP joined prior counsel to file a petition for rehearing en banc after the Ninth Circuit ruled against petitioner, finding that the petitioner was not entitled to a bond hearing.
The court denied the petition and issued an amended opinion.
Filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court.
APA challenge to USCIS policy denying persons with Temporary Protected Status opportunity to apply for adjustment of status based on U.S. citizen immediate relative.
Current status: District Court order granting plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. Order from Ninth Circuit upholding district court’s order, finding the government’s interpretation violates the plain statutory language, and clarifying the right of all TPS recipients in the Ninth Circuit to apply for adjustment of status when they have approved visa petitions filed by immediate relatives.
Individual damages action against police officer and the City of Spokane for unlawful arrest of plaintiff—who was the victim of a traffic accident—while the police officer contacted CBP about the plaintiff and waited for CBP to arrive on the scene.
Current status: Complaint filed. Settlement entered, providing damages for Plaintiff, revision to the Spokane Police Department policy manual, and training to officers.

References: § 1983
 § 1983
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 1983