Border Humanity Project: ACLU's Fight for Humanity at the Border

Congress passes the Refugee Act of 1980, aligning the U.S. with the Refugee Convention of 1951, and ensuring people who are fleeing persecution on “account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion” are not sent back to places where they risk persecution.

The ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project (IRP) is founded under the leadership of Lucas Guttentag with a mission to protect the rights of immigrants.

The ACLU joins several religious and civil rights organizations in a class action lawsuit challenging the Reagan administration’s discriminatory denial of nearly all asylum applications from people from El Salvador and Guatemala, where civil wars involving U.S.-funded militaries were raging.

Eventually, the government agreed to give new asylum hearings to 240,000 individuals from these countries

The ACLU joins the Center for Constitutional Rights and Yale law students in challenging the detention of Haitian asylum seekers living with HIV at a detention camp at Guantánamo, eventually winning their release and closure of the camp.

California voters adopt Proposition 187, denying most education, health, and social services to anyone suspected of not being a citizen or legal resident. The proposition also requires police, health care professionals, and teachers to verify and report people’s immigration status, including the status of children. The ACLU of Southern California and Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) bring a constitutional challenge against the measure, ultimately prevailing after a five-year legal battle that prevented its implementation.

Congress enacts two sweeping new punitive laws: The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act imposes criminal penalties and restrictions on a broad range of immigrants, while the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act imposes a five-year bar against most legal immigrants before they may be considered for federal public benefits.

The U.S. implements an “expedited removal” system that operates in virtually complete secrecy and short- circuits due process for people seeking asylum. Low-level immigration officers have authority to deny entry to people seeking refuge based on an on-the- spot determination. The ACLU — leading a coalition of civil rights organizations, refugee groups, and pro bono law firms — organizes a legal challenge to the expedited removal system.

California passes AB 540, a landmark law expanding in-state tuition eligibility to certain students that graduated from California high schools, including those who are undocumented. In 2010, the California Supreme Court upholds the law after challenges from anti-immigrant groups. The ACLU files a friend-of-the-court brief in the case, Martinez v. Regents of the University of California, along with the National Immigration Law Center, ACLU of Northern California, ACLU of Southern California, and ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties.

In response to terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the U.S. implements a broad range of hardline restrictions targeting immigrants, Muslims, Arabs, and South Asians. The U.S. terminates further negotiations with Mexico over an immigration legalization agreement, imposes new border restrictions, cuts refugee resettlement, creates a discriminatory registration system (NSEERS), and passes the REAL ID Act, disqualifying many categories of immigrants from obtaining drivers’ licenses.

Congress passes the Homeland Security Act of 2002, creating the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and numerous agencies under its direction, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), which houses the U.S. Border Patrol. Funding to these agencies skyrockets in the years that follow: The number of Border Patrol agents nearly doubles from Fiscal Years 2003 to 2019. The number of ICE agents devoted to its office of Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) nearly triples during this period.

Anti-immigrant activists form the Minutemen, a vigilante group intended to monitor, intimidate, and deter immigrants suspected of entering without inspection at the southern border, especially in Arizona. ACLU of New Mexico trains teams of volunteer legal observers to follow, photograph, and videotape the Minutemen to gather evidence for possible civil rights lawsuits.

ACLU, ACLU of Arizona, and MALDEF bring a class action lawsuit against Sheriff Joe Arpaio successfully challenging his office's pattern and practice of racially profiling Latine residents during traffic stops and illegally detaining them on suspicion regarding their immigration status. They also bring a separate class action lawsuit challenging Arizona’s Proposition 100, a state constitutional amendment that prohibited bail for suspected undocumented immigrants, a law ultimately struck down by the courts.

ACLU of Texas represents nine Americans challenging the U.S. Department of State's refusal to issue them passports because of the geographic region of their births and because their births were attended by midwives. The class action lawsuit was filed by the ACLU of Texas, ACLU, the international law firm Hogan & Hartson LLP, and Refugio del Rio Grande, Inc.

The Ninth Circuit upholds an injunction ordering the government to provide bond hearings to asylum seekers detained for six months or more, after the ACLU files a class action lawsuit, Rodriguez v. Hayes, challenging prolonged detention of asylum seekers without a bond hearing.

Arizona passes SB 1070, the “show- me-your-papers” law, subjecting people who appear or sound "foreign" to discriminatory traffic stops and immigration status checks. The law also authorizes police to arrest people believed to be deportable and creates state crimes for failure to carry federal immigration papers and working without authorization. ACLU affiliates issue travel alerts warning their state residents of the risk that they will be racially profiled if they travel to or though Arizona.

ACLU of Arizona files civil rights complaints on behalf of five people who were unlawfully stopped by Border Patrol “roving patrols” in Arizona. The complaint also cites cases involving Latine residents of Tucson and other Arizona cities, as well as Native American residents of the Tohono O’odham Nation, who have been pulled over and interrogated by Border Patrol agents for no apparent reason other than their perceived race or ethnicity.

ACLU and affiliates sue Arizona and several other states that enact SB 1070 “copycat” laws. The U.S. Supreme Court strikes down three of SB 1070’s provisions but leaves in place the provision authorizing police to inquire into immigration status during traffic stops. ACLU announces a “war chest” to challenge these laws in court and prevent their spread to other states.

In Texas, anti-immigrant state legislators narrowly fail to pass an SB 1070 copycat law. ACLU of Texas works behind the scenes by activating law enforcement, faith communities, and business voices in opposition to the law, and mobilizing public opposition to stop the bill.

ACLU of Texas files suit in federal district court seeking class action damages on behalf of three immigrant women who were sexually assaulted while in custody of ICE at the T. Don Hutto Family Residential Center in Taylor, Texas, along with numerous others who experienced similar trauma. This litigation was a key moment as the ACLU and ACLU of Texas pursue a campaign to challenge the practice of detaining immigrant children and families.

On May 9, ACLU of New Mexico's Regional Center for Border Rights, together with ACLU, file a complaint to DHS documenting abuse against travelers at ports of entry on the United States’ border with Mexico. The ACLU calls for the prompt investigation of individual allegations of abuse by CBP.

ACLU of New Mexico's Regional Center for Border Rights and ACLU press CBP to develop policies governing use of force. The ACLU begins developing recommendations to address CBP use- of-force incidents. These recommendations include calls for specific revisions to CBP’s Use of Force Policy Handbook; an upgrade in equipment including body-worn cameras for CBP agents; a robust and transparent system of oversight and accountability; and a call for CBP to develop a policy on notification and reporting on all deaths that occur as a result of a CBP encounter.

ACLU of Texas and ACLU of New Mexico sue CBP and the University Medical Center of El Paso for strip searching a U.S. citizen and subjecting her to six hours of invasive searches — including rectal and vaginal probes — without a warrant. Three years later, CBP and the medical center reach a record settlement with the woman totaling over $1.5 million. All four BHP affiliates send letters to 40 health care providers covering 110 facilities warning them against similar conduct and advising them of the rights and responsibilities of hospital personnel when confronted by federal agents who request they perform invasive and illegal body cavity searches.

ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties files a class action lawsuit on behalf of hundreds of immigrants misled by the federal government and wrongly expelled to Mexico, negotiating a comprehensive settlement with DHS that includes an agreement allowing individual plaintiffs and a class of qualified persons to return to the U.S. to seek legal status. (Lopez-Venegas v. Johnson)

Arivaca, Arizona residents sue Border Patrol over their right to protest checkpoint operations (represented by ACLU of Arizona and ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties). The group, People Helping People, had been monitoring racial profiling and abuse at the checkpoint, and Border Patrol responded by threatening arrest of any protester who strayed inside a large “enforcement zone” surrounding the checkpoint.

ACLU leads a coalition letter asking the United Nations Human Rights Committee to conduct an assessment of U.S. compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) as it relates to human rights violations at its international borders. This calls attention to the expanded militarization of border communities, deaths along the border, abuses in detention, and traumatic family separations.

ACLU, ACLU of Arizona, and ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties file Rodriguez v. Swartz on behalf of Araceli Rodriguez, for the unjustified killing of her son, Jose Antonio Elena Rodriguez, who was shot 10 times by a Border Patrol agent firing into Mexico from the U.S. side of the border. In September 2015, Agent Swartz was indicted for second degree murder, the first time a Border Patrol agent had been federally prosecuted for murder.

ACLU files two lawsuits challenging an Obama administration policy of locking up asylum-seeking mothers and children in Texas and New Mexico in order to intimidate and deter others from coming to the United States.

ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties sues the city of Escondido for violating the federal Fair Housing Act by refusing to approve a permit for Southwest Key Programs, a non-profit government contractor seeking to provide housing to unaccompanied children fleeing violence and persecution in Central America. With support from the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, ACLU and Escondido settle to redress unlawful discrimination against hundreds of vulnerable children. (Southwest Key Programs v. City of Escondido)

ACLU and partners win a civil contempt trial against anti-immigrant Sheriff Joe Arpaio and two other top commanders in the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office in Arizona for their refusal to comply with court orders. The U.S. Justice Department then brings criminal contempt charges against Arpaio.

ACLU of Arizona and ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties file a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit that ultimately yields tens of thousands of documents showing the pervasive abuse and neglect of unaccompanied immigrant children detained by CBP. In 2018, the documents were published in conjunction with the International Human Rights Clinic at the University of Chicago Law School.

ACLU of Arizona and partners file Doe v. Johnson, a class action lawsuit against DHS officials, challenging conditions in Border Patrol holding cells — overcrowding, extreme cold, denial of sleep, lack of medical care, and deprivation of food and water. Plaintiffs file the lawsuit on behalf of all persons who are now or will be confined in a Tucson CBP detention facility for one or more nights. The court granted a permanent injunction in 2020 ordering the agency to implement various reforms and allowing plaintiffs’ counsel to monitor conditions in Tucson facilities.

Latine leaders in Maricopa County play a key role in ousting Sheriff Joe Arpaio from his 24-year tenure. During the election, Arpaio was forced to carry the political burden of legal challenges against him, filed by ACLU and others, with his opponents pointing to the millions in legal fees and damages and the distraction caused by his controversies.

After an El Cajon, California police officer fatally shoots Alfred Olango, an unarmed African immigrant experiencing a mental health crisis, ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties provides “Know Your Rights” materials and guidance to demonstrators and deploys legal observers to protect individuals’ First Amendment right to assemble and protest.

Texas enacts SB 4, an “anti-sanctuary” law requiring local government and law enforcement officials to comply with federal detainer requests and carry out other federal immigration directives. ACLU of Texas and ACLU sue, but the law remains in place after the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reverses the district court’s ruling that had struck down almost all provisions of the bill.

The ACLU and its affiliates across the country file legal actions challenging the Muslim ban – President Trump’s executive order banning foreign nationals from seven predominantly Muslim countries from visiting the United States and suspending the entry of refugees from these countries. On June 26, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States upholds the Trump administration’s third Muslim ban.

The Regional Center for Border Rights relocates to Texas, with support from ACLU. ACLU of Texas leads the continuation of work conducting “Know Your Rights” education, documenting government misconduct and advocating for reforms that protect human life and dignity. The office remains a collaboration of all four border affiliates.

ACLU and ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties file a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s family separation policy. The lawsuit, expanded to a class action in March, was filed on behalf of an asylum-seeking Congolese mother who was separated from her 7-year-old daughter, one of thousands who suffered needless cruelty under a policy intentionally designed to separate children from their parents. The suit ultimately results in the reunification of thousands of migrant children with their families. (Ms. L. v. ICE)

A federal judge blocks a Trump asylum ban that illegally denied people who entered between ports of entry the opportunity to seek asylum, in response to a lawsuit brought by the ACLU, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the Center for Constitutional Rights.

The ACLU and other groups file a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s implementation of the Migrant Protection Protocols, more commonly known as “Remain in Mexico,” a policy that forces asylum seekers to remain at risk in Mexico while their cases are considered in the U.S.

ACLU of New Mexico exposes and calls on officials to investigate the activities of the United Constitutional Patriots (UCP), a militia group that is patrolling the southwest border, taking dozens of immigrant families hostage and turning them over to Border Patrol. Ultimately, the leader of the group is convicted of federal gun crimes and UCP abandons its activities.

ACLU of New Mexico and ACLU of Texas expose the activities of “We Build the Wall” (WBW), an organization backed by political strategist Steve Bannon that is building a border wall across federal property at a point where the borders of New Mexico, Texas, and Mexico intersect. The affiliates lobby the International Boundary & Water Commission to impose restrictions on the wall, which it ultimately does. Soon thereafter, Bannon and the organization's founder, Brian Kolflage, are charged with federal wire fraud crimes in a scheme to divert privately-raised funds for WBW to Kolflage's personal use. Kolflage and two other WBW officials plead guilty while Bannon is ultimately pardoned by then- President Trump.

ACLU of Texas issues a report on the impact of the federal border wall and subsequently goes to court to stop the wall with ACLU and the Sierra Club. In July 2023, the case is finally settled when the government agrees to halt further wall construction and mitigate environmental damage in the sites illegally funded by the Trump administration using stolen Defense Department funding.

ACLU launches the Border Humanity Project, a new multi-state initiative aligning the efforts of ACLU and the four southwest border affiliates. The project aims to strengthen the ACLU’s nationwide work, capacity, and mobilization power in support of the humane, equitable, and lawful treatment of border residents and migrants.

The ACLU, ACLU of Texas, and legal partners file a lawsuit seeking an immediate halt to the Title 42 expulsion policy, which illegally restricted immigration at the border based on an unprecedented and unlawful invocation of the Public Health Service Act.

With the advocacy of coalition partners, in 2021, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors passes a $7.23 billion county budget that reflects ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties' shared values and priorities. Included were funds for the creation of an Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs, the Immigrant Legal Defense Program, and Cash Assistance for Low-Income Immigrants.

Additionally, the ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties and coalition partners successfully advocate for the San Diego County Board of Supervisors to allocate $3 million toward humanitarian reception services for migrants released onto the streets by CBP.

After ACLU of New Mexico, ACLU of Texas, and community partners document the high rates of fatalities and serious injuries resulting from Border Patrol's vehicle pursuits, CBP significantly revises its vehicle pursuit policy. ACLU of New Mexico analyzes the new policy in a widely distributed brief, identifying critical questions about how CBP plans to implement the new policy.