Alejandro RODRIGUEZ, for Himself and on Behalf of a Class of Similarly-Situated Individuals; Abdirizak Aden Farah, for Himself and on Behalf of a Class of Similarly-Situated Individuals; Jose Farias Cornejo; Yussuf Abdikadir; Abel Perez Ruelas, Petitioners-Appellees/Cross-Appellants, and Efren Orozco, Petitioner,
v.
David MARIN, Field Office Director, Los Angeles District, Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Kirstjen Nielsen, Secretary, Homeland Security; Matthew G. Whitaker, Acting Attorney General; Wesley Lee, Assistant Field Office Director, Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Rodney Penner, Captain, Mira Loma Detention Center; Sandra Hutchens, Sheriff of Orange County; Nguyen, Officer Officer-in-Charge, Theo Lacy Facility; Davis Nighswonger, Captain, Commander, Theo Lacy Facility; Mike Kreuger, Captain, Operations Manager, James A. Musick Facility; Arthur Edwards, Officer-in-Charge, Santa Ana City Jail; Russell Davis, Jail Administrator, Santa Ana City Jail; James McHenry, Director, Executive Office for Immigration Review, Respondents-Appellants Cross-Appellees.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Argued and Submitted October 29, 2018 Pasadena, California.
Filed November 19, 2018.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Sarah Stevens Wilson (argued), Assistant United States Attorney; Erez Reuveni , Assistant Director; William C. Peachey , Director, District Court Section; Chad A. Readler , Acting Assistant Attorney General; Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Birmingham, Alabama; for Respondents-Appellants/Cross-Appellees.
Sarah H. Paoletti , University of Pennsylvania Law School Transnational Legal Clinic, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for Amici Curiae International Law Professors and Human Rights Clinicians and Clinical Programs.
Holly Stafford Cooper , University of California Davis Law School Immigration Law Clinic, Davis, California, for Amicus Curiae University of California Davis Law School Immigration Law Clinic.
Max Carter-Oberstone and Samuel P. Siegel , Associate Deputy Solicitors General; Michael J. Mongan , Deputy Solicitor General; Janill L. Richards , Principal Deputy Solicitor General; Edward C. DuMont , Solicitor General; Xavier Becerra , Attorney General; Office of the Attorney General, Sacramento, California; George Jepsen , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Hartford, Connecticut; Janet T. Mills , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Augusta, Maine; Maura Healey , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Boston, Massachusetts; Barbara D. Underwood , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, New York, New York; Ellen F. Rosenblum , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Salem, Oregon; Peter F. Kilmartin , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Providence, Rhode Island; Thomas J. Donovan Jr. , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Montpelier, Vermont; Robert W. Ferguson , Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Olympia, Washington; for Amici Curiae States of California, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington, and the District of Columbia.
Darren S. Teshima , Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, San Francisco, California; Nina Rabin , Director, Immigrant Family Legal, Los Angeles, California; for Amici Curiae Scholars and Researchers in Sociology, Criminology, Anthropology, Psychology, Geography, Public Health, Medicine, Latin American. Studies, and Law.
Lawrence J. Joseph , Washington, D.C.; Christopher J. Hajec , Director of Litigation, Immigration Reform Law Institute, Washington, D.C.; for Amicus Curiae Immigration Reform Law Institute.
Before: Kim McLane Wardlaw and Ronald M. Gould, Circuit Judges, and Sam E. Haddon, District Judge.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
ORDER
In Jennings v. Rodriguez, ___ U.S. ___, 138 S.Ct. 830, 200 L.Ed.2d 122 (2018), the Supreme Court held that we misapplied the canon of constitutional avoidance to hold that certain immigration detention statutes, namely 8 U.S.C. §§ 1225(b), 1226(a), and 1226(c), implicitly contain a reasonableness determination after which due process concerns require that persons in prolonged mandatory detention are entitled...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.