Immigration at the Border

Immigration at the Border

Council Submits Amicus Brief on Insufficiency of Notice in Migrant Protection Protocols Proceedings

Council Submits Amicus Brief on Insufficiency of Notice in Migrant Protection Protocols Proceedings

The brief argues that DHS’ service practices for MPP tear sheets deny respondents their statutory right to notice of the time and place of their removal proceedings, their statutory right to a full and fair hearing, and, consequently, due process of law. Read More

Council Files Amicus Brief Supporting the Release of Individuals from Immigration Detention During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Council Files Amicus Brief Supporting the Release of Individuals from Immigration Detention During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The American Immigration Council filed this amicus curiae brief in support of individuals who sought release from detention due to their significant risk of infection from COVID-19. Read More

<em>Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center v. Wolf</em>

Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center v. Wolf

The American Immigration Council and the American Immigration Lawyers Association submitted an amicus brief in Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center v. Wolf, a case filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Texas, the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project, and ACLU of the District of Columbia. The amicus brief urges the… Read More

<em>United States v. Hernandez-Becerra</em> - Ninth Circuit

United States v. Hernandez-Becerra – Ninth Circuit

In this case, the Federal Defenders of San Diego argue that the court should have conducted a deeper inquiry into the voluntariness of a guilty plea offered by 18-year-old Claudia Hernandez-Becerra because she spent three days detained in an “hielera” before her arraignment for entering the United States without permission. Read More

<em>ACLU v. DHS</em> - Ninth Circuit

ACLU v. DHS – Ninth Circuit

The American Immigration Council and the Immigrants’ Rights and Human Trafficking Program and Boston University School of Law filed an amicus brief in ACLU v. DHS, a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. In ACLU v. DHS, the ACLU asks the Court to… Read More

<em>Guerra v. Shanahan</em> – Second Circuit

Guerra v. Shanahan – Second Circuit

The American Immigration Council, in collaboration with the American Immigration Lawyers Association, filed an amicus brief in Guerra v. Shanahan.  The amicus brief argued that the pre-final order detention statute, 8 U.S.C. § 1226, governed the Petitioner’s detention pending his withholding-only proceedings, and therefore he should not be subject to… Read More

<em>Crespin v. Evans</em> – Fourth Circuit

Crespin v. Evans – Fourth Circuit

The American Immigration Council, in collaboration with the American Immigration Lawyers Association, filed an amicus brief in Crespin v. Evans.  The amicus brief argued that the pre-final order detention statute, 8 U.S.C. § 1226, governed the Petitioner’s detention pending his withholding-only proceedings, and therefore he should not be subject to… Read More

Ferino-Sanchez v. Sessions — Fourth Circuit

Ferino-Sanchez v. Sessions — Fourth Circuit

This amicus brief arguing that any Fourth Amendment violation by state and local law enforcement officers — not just egregious Fourth Amendments violations — should require the suppression of evidence in immigration court proceedings, which is the same standard that applies in the criminal justice arena. Read More

Jennings v. Rodriguez - Ninth Circuit

Jennings v. Rodriguez – Ninth Circuit

The American Immigration Council, in collaboration with the American Immigration Law Association, filed an amicus brief in the case Jennings v. Rodriguez, calling for the Court to overturn Demore v. Kim and end mandatory detention. Read More

<em>Ashcroft v. Abbasi</em> (formerly Turkman v. Ashcroft) – U.S. Supreme Court

Ashcroft v. Abbasi (formerly Turkman v. Ashcroft) – U.S. Supreme Court

The Council, along with the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild (NIPNLG), is seeking to preserve federal court review of damages actions brought by noncitizens for abuse of authority by immigration agents. In actions brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), the government routinely moves to dismiss these cases on a variety of jurisdictional grounds, including by arguing that INA § 242(g) bars the court’s review of damages claims in any case involving removal procedures, and that a remedy under Bivens is not available in immigration-related actions. In essence, the government is attempting to deprive those who have been harmed by immigration agents of any remedy in federal court. Read More

Make a contribution

Make a direct impact on the lives of immigrants.

logoimg