Federal Court Blocks Key Parts of Georgia and Alabama’s Anti-Immigrant Laws

NEW YORK – The Second Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday issued an administrative stay while it considers the government’s request for an emergency stay of Judge Sessions’ order to transfer Rümeysa Öztürk to Vermont, as well as her legal team’s opposition to that request. The appeals court ordered the government to reply to her opposition by Thursday, May 1, and set arguments for Tuesday, May 6. The Second Circuit’s order is not a ruling on the merits of the government’s request to keep Ms. Öztürk in a Louisiana detention center. Ms. Öztürk’s legal team released the following statement in response: “Rümeysa Öztürk never should have been arrested and detained, period. We are ready to argue her case before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, and we won’t stop fighting until she is free.” Ms. Öztürk, a former Fulbright scholar and current Tufts University Ph.D. student researching child development, was arrested on March 25 by plainclothes Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents in Massachusetts in retaliation for co-authoring an op-ed in the Tufts student newspaper. After the arrest, the government transported her through multiple states, then flew her thousands of miles away to Louisiana. On April 4, just 24 hours after a court hearing, a federal judge in Massachusetts ruled that the challenge to ICE’s detention of Ms. Öztürk should continue in Vermont, not Louisiana. The U.S. District Court for the District of Vermont affirmed that Ms. Öztürk’s federal case should continue in Vermont and that the government must transfer her back to a facility in Vermont by May 1. The government appealed this decision last week. Ms. Öztürk is represented in immigration court by Mahsa Khanbabai and Marty Rosenbluth, and in federal court by Mahsa Khanbabai, the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Massachusetts, ACLU of Vermont, CLEAR, and Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP.

WASHINGTON – The Trump administration today signed two new executive orders that would target sanctuary cities and direct law enforcement to pursue legal action against state or local officials accused of “obstructing criminal or immigration law enforcement.” The executive order targeting sanctuary cities directs the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Department of Homeland Security to prosecute state or local officials who refuse to assist with the Trump administration’s plan to deport immigrants who contribute to the economy and communities nationwide. It also penalizes states that provide in-state tuition to noncitizens. The order echoes previous guidance issued by the DOJ that suggested state and local officials would face federal prosecution for limiting the amount of assistance they provide to federal agencies carrying out immigration enforcement. The second executive order directs law enforcement to pursue legal action against state officials, seeks to prevent accountability for law enforcement misconduct, and encourages police brutality. In response to this news, Naureen Shah, director of government affairs for the ACLU’s Equality Division, had the following reaction: “These executive orders are just the latest escalation in the Trump administration’s shakedown of cities, states, and elected officials that refuse to offer up local resources for the administration’s mass deportation and detention agenda. States and cities have the right to decide how best to use local resources, and they overwhelmingly agree that taxpayer dollars are better spent investing in programs that improve public safety and support our communities – not policies that tear them apart by deporting our immigrant neighbors and loved ones. Similarly, President Trump does not control the more 17,000 local law enforcement agencies across this country. That authority remains, appropriately, with the people in cities and towns nationwide, who must continue pushing for reforms that protect rights and improve public safety.” “These orders have no legal basis and are another example of President Trump’s relentless campaign to attack the integrity of our legal system and separation of powers by targeting judges, lawyers, and other officials who refuse to comply with his extreme agenda.”

JENA, La. — Attorneys for Mahmoud Khalil, a U.S. green card holder who has been detained for almost two months after speaking out in support of Palestinian freedom, filed two motions early this morning seeking to ensure fairness and transparency at his upcoming immigration hearings. The two motions demand the court address serious due process violations that marred his last hearing and ensure the public’s right to access future proceedings. At Mr. Khalil’s April 11 hearing, despite federal policy guaranteeing lawyers the right to use electronic devices during immigration court proceedings, his in-person counsel was abruptly barred from bringing laptops or phones into the courtroom — while Department of Homeland Security attorneys were allowed to use theirs. Even after Nora Ahmed of the ACLU of Louisiana confirmed her right to bring electronics with facility officials before the hearing, she was forced to surrender all devices moments before court began. She was also denied the chance to raise the issue with the facility administrator or to challenge the decision on the record. As the motion explains, “the denial implicates issues of fundamental fairness in these proceedings and was particularly troubling because it occurred at a hearing of such enormous consequence for Mr. Khalil.” In a separate filing, Mr. Khalil’s legal team also urged the court to expand public access to future hearings. During previous hearings, hundreds of members of the public attempted to observe remotely but were shut out — 550 individuals were denied access to a Webex link on April 8 alone. No overflow room was provided, and no accommodation was made for those turned away, despite widespread public interest and the First Amendment right to open court proceedings. The motions filed today seek to correct these violations by ensuring Mr. Khalil’s attorneys can use necessary electronic devices in court, and by expanding access to hearings through Webex, telephonic lines, or an overflow room for members of the public and press. “What happened to Mahmoud Khalil is not unique — detained immigrants across the country face barriers to a fair hearing every day,” said Nora Ahmed, legal director of the ACLU of Louisiana. “By standing up for Mahmoud’s rights, we’re fighting to make sure that no one else is silenced by arbitrary restrictions or denied the basic tools they need to defend themselves in court. Fairness, transparency, and equal access to justice must be guaranteed for everyone — not just the government.” These motions come just days after the Trump administration admitted Mr. Khalil was taken without an arrest warrant. In the federal court, Mr. Khalil’s legal team is continuing to seek bail, an order compelling the government to return him to New Jersey, and a preliminary injunction (PI) that would immediately release him from custody and allow him to reunite with his family in New York while his immigration case proceeds. If granted, the PI would also block President Trump’s policy of arresting and detaining noncitizens who have engaged in First Amendment protected activity in support of Palestinian rights. Mr. Khalil is represented by Dratel & Lewis, the Center for Constitutional Rights, CLEAR, Van Der Hout LLP, Washington Square Legal Services, the American Civil Liberties Union, the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU), and the ACLU of New Jersey.

New Orleans, LA - Today, in the early hours of the morning, the New Orleans Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Field Office deported at least two families, including two mothers and their minor children – three of whom are U.S. citizen children aged 2, 4, and 7. One of the mothers is currently pregnant. The families, who had lived in the United States for years and had deep ties to their communities, were deported from the U.S. under deeply troubling circumstances that raise serious due process concerns. ICE detained the first family on Tuesday, April 22, and the second family on Thursday, April 24. In both cases, ICE held the families incommunicado, refusing or failing to respond to multiple attempts by attorneys and family members to contact them. In one instance, a mother was granted less than one minute on the phone before the call was abruptly terminated when her spouse tried to provide legal counsel’s phone number. As a result, the families were completely isolated during critical moments when decisions were being made about the welfare of their minor children. This included decisions with serious implications for the health, safety, and legal rights of the children involved–without any opportunity to coordinate with caretakers or consult with legal representatives. These actions stand in direct violation of ICE’s own written and informal directives, which mandate coordination for the care of minor children with willing caretakers–regardless of immigration status–when deportations are being carried out. Both families have possible immigration relief, but because ICE denied them access to their attorneys, legal counsel was unable to assist and advise them in time. With one family, government attorneys had assured legal counsel that a legal call would be arranged within 24-48 hours, as well as a call with a family member. Instead, just after close of business and after courts closed for the day, ICE suddenly reversed course and informed counsel that the family would be deported at 6am the next morning–before the court reopened. That family filed a habeas corpus petition and motion for a temporary restraining order, which was never ruled on because of their rapid early-morning deportation. In the case of the other family, a U.S. citizen child suffering from a rare form of metastatic cancer was deported without medication or the ability to consult with their treating physicians–despite ICE being notified in advance of the child’s urgent medical needs. In addition, one of the mothers who was deported is pregnant, and ICE proceeded with her deportation without ensuring any continuity of prenatal care or medical oversight. These actions represent a shocking – although increasingly common–abuse of power. NOLA ICE has inflicted harm and jeopardized the lives and health of vulnerable children and a pregnant woman. The cruelty and deliberate denial of legal and medical access are not only unlawful, but inhumane. Teresa Reyes-Flores, Southeast Dignity not Detention Coalition (SEDND) - “ICE’s actions show a blatant violation of due process and basic human rights. The families were disappeared, cut off from their lawyers and loved ones, and rushed to be deported, stripping their parents of the chance to protect their U.S. citizen children.” Gracie Willis, National Immigration Project - ”What we saw from ICE over the last several days is horrifying and baffling. Families have been ripped apart unnecessarily. These mothers had no opportunity to speak with their co-parents to make the kinds of choices that parents are entitled to make for their children, the kinds of decisions that millions of parents make every day: “what is best for our child?” We should be gravely concerned that ICE has been given tacit approval to both detain and deport U.S. citizen children despite the availability and willingness of U.S.-based caregivers who, only because of ICE’s own actions, cannot find or contact them.” Alanah Odoms, Executive Director of the ACLU of Louisiana - “Once again, the government has used deceptive tactics to deny people their rights. These outrageous actions must be condemned. We as a nation are better than this. These families deserve better. They must be returned.” Fatima Khan, Louisiana Organization for Refugees and Immigrants (LORI) - “ICE’s actions today go far past the typical inhumanity of their detention operations in Louisiana. They ignored their own protocols on legal access and protecting children’s rights to enact an expedient deportation they know to be unlawful. Not only that, they disappeared these families before any U.S. Court could stand up for its children. We should all be mortified.” Erin Hebert, Ware Immigration - “Deporting U.S. citizen children is illegal, unconstitutional, and immoral. The speed, brutality, and clandestine manner in which these children were deported is beyond unconscionable, and every official responsible for it should be held accountable.” Homero López, Jr., Immigration Services and Legal Advocacy (ISLA) - “These deplorable actions demonstrate ICE's increasing willingness to violate all protections for immigrants as well as those of their children. These types of disappearances are reminiscent of the darkest eras in our country's history and put everyone, regardless of immigration status, at risk.” Mich P. Gonzalez, Sanctuary of the South - “A government agency that sequesters and deports vulnerable mothers with their US citizen children without due process must be defunded, not rewarded with an additional 45 billion dollars to continue at taxpayers’ expense. These families were lawfully complying with ICE’s orders and for this they suffered cruel and traumatic separation. If this is what the Trump administration is orchestrating just three months in, we should all be terrified of what the next four years will bring.”