Dear Karen,

As we close out March, please see below (and visit our microsite) for the latest updates in red state litigation over immigrant-inclusive policies. 

View Litigation Tracker

April 3, 2023

Seven individuals move to intervene as defendants in fight over CHNV parole programs 

On Wednesday, a group of seven U.S. citizens applying to sponsor a noncitizen from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, or Venezuela (“CHNV”) to come to the United States through the recently created CHNV parole programs filed a motion asking to intervene in the red state lawsuit, Texas v. DHS, challenging those programs. The individuals—who include educators, a doctor, a truck driver, a nonprofit organizer, and a retired businessman—are serving as sponsors for a variety of reasons that underscore the broad benefits of the CHNV programs: to reunify families; to facilitate life-saving medical care; to bring those in danger to safety; and to live their moral, religious, or humanitarian values. Their participation in the lawsuit (should the motion be granted) would help ensure that when the court is considering the red states’ claims, it also considers the compelling interests and perspectives of individuals who have the most at stake (which are too often ignored entirely in these politically driven clashes between the federal and state governments). 

If the motion is granted, the individuals—who are represented by the Justice Action Center, RAICES, and the UCLA Center for Immigration Law and Policy—will be added to the case as defendants, and they would defend the CHNV programs' legality alongside the federal government defendants, including at the bench trial currently scheduled to begin on June 13. Those interested in submitting an amicus brief in the case should contact [email protected].

Nonprofits move to quash LA & FL subpoenas for names of asylum seekers served in last five years 

In late March, several nonprofits filed motions to quash (void) document subpoenas served on them by Louisiana and Florida in the multistate challenge, Arizona v. Garland, to the asylum regulation that went into effect last May. Among other information, the subpoenas demand that the organizations identify the individual asylum seekers they have served over the last five years in Louisiana and/or Florida. Thus far motions to quash have been filed by Innovation Law Lab and three small Louisiana-based organizations, as well as a private Baton Rouge-based law firm that handles immigration cases. 

The states are ostensibly demanding this information to support their standing (a constitutional requirement to bring suit), which is based on their claim that immigration financially injures them. Legally, the subpoenas are pretty clearly out of bounds, but perhaps Louisiana and Florida thought these small organizations would acquiesce to the subpoenas, rather than fighting them. Judge Joseph has scheduled a hearing on the motions to quash for tomorrow. 

Unfortunately, there is currently no way to know what organizations (except for those who have moved to quash) have received similar subpoenas. If your organization has received such a subpoena, please feel free to get in touch with me at [email protected].  

* * * * *

As always, we’ll keep you posted on these and other cases.

Thanks for reading,

Esther Sung

Legal Director

Donate to Support Our Work
Justice Action Center, P.O. Box 27280, Los Angeles, CA 90027, 323.316.0944,
Facebook  Twitter  Instagram