1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.3d
  4. 571 F.Supp.3d
  5. 571 F.Supp.3d 1173 (2021)
 

LAS AMERICAS IMMIGRANT ADVOCACY CENTER v. BIDEN

Case No. 3:19-cv-02051-IM.

571 F.Supp.3d 1173 (2021)

LAS AMERICAS IMMIGRANT ADVOCACY CENTER; Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc.; Innovation Law Lab; Santa Fe Dreamers Project; Southern Poverty Law Center; and Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project, Plaintiffs, v. Joseph R. BIDEN, in his official capacity as President of the United States; Merrick B. Garland, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the United States; U.S. Department of Justice; Executive Office for Immigraion Review; and David L. Neal, in his official capacity as EOIR Director of the United States, Defendants.

United States District Court, D. Oregon.

Signed November 24, 2021.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Stephen W. Manning , Jordan Cunnings , and Tess Hellgren , Innovation Law Lab, The Oregon Trail Building, 333 SW 5th Avenue, Suite 200, Portland, OR 97204; Thomas R. Johnson , Bryan D. Beel , Heidee Stoller , Nathan R. Morales , and Alletta S. Brenner , Perkins Coie LLP, 1120 NW Couch Street, 10th Floor, Portland, OR 97209; Melissa Crow , Southern Poverty Law Center, 1101 17th Street, NW, Suite 705, Washington, DC 20036; Rebecca M. Cassler and Gracie H. Willis , Southern Poverty Law Center, 150 East Ponce de Leon Avenue, Suite 340, Decatur, GA 30030. Attorneys for Plaintiffs.

Brian C. Ward , Elissa Fudim , Erez Reuveni , U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, PO Box 868, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044. Attorneys for Defendants.

Gary M. Berne , Keith S. Dubanevich , Stoll Stoll Berne Lokting & Shlachter, PC, 209 SW Oak Street, Fifth Floor, Portland, OR 97204. Attorneys for amicus curiae, Former Immigration Judges.

Cody B. Hoesly , Larkins Vacura, LLP, 121 SW Morrison Street, Suite 700, Portland, OR 97204. Attorneys for amicus curiae, Professors of Immigration Law, Civil Procedure and Administrative Law.

OPINION AND ORDER

When this Court considered Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, ECF 24, the Court declined to dismiss claims aside from those seeking enjoinder of "asylum-free zones," ECF 79. Upon further and more developed briefing, this Court has reconsidered the issues and decides as follows. Because this Court...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

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.

Citing Cases