Source: https://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=10497&amp;search=
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 22:08:23+00:00

Document:
On August 31, 2007, two plaintiffs filed suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio individually and on behalf of over 120 individuals who were arrested and detained several days earlier during an immigration enforcement raid conducted by the local sheriff and federal agents of the Immigration and Custom Enforcement at a chicken processing plant in Fairfield, Ohio. The Emergency Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Writ of Mandamus, Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, and Motion for a Stay of Removal, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. Plaintiffs alleged that the conduct of the local and federal officers was in violation of the Supremacy Clause, the Due Process Clause, the Equal Protection Clause, 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiffs also sought relief under the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1151, §1255; Administration Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 701, Mandamus Act 28 U.S.C. § 1361, Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 220 and the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651.
After the suit was filed, the parties reached an informal agreement that no detained workers would be immediately deported or moved to a jail outside of the Greater Cincinnati area.
Koch Foods, the owner of the raided chicken plant, sought emergency intervention in the case and filed a motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and preliminary injunction to prevent the government from removing or deporting any of the detained Koch Foods workers. Anticipating further legal exposure, Koch Foods asserted that it needed to interview the detained workers to aid in its defense against any potential criminal investigation and prosecution.
Over the course of the next several months, many of the workers either left the country or opted to drop the charges. As a result, the Plaintiffs moved for, and were granted, dismissal of the case without prejudice on October 26, 2007.

References: § 1981
 § 1983
 § 1151
 §1255
 § 701
 § 1361
 § 220
 § 1651