Dear Karen,

As we look forward to the May flowers to come, please see below (and visit our microsite) for the latest updates in red state litigation over immigrant-inclusive policies, including two updates on cases mentioned in our last newsletter

View Litigation Tracker

April 21, 2023

U.S. citizens’ granted intervention to defend the CHNV parole programs 

Yesterday, the judge in the red state challenge to the new parole programs for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans (CHNV) ruled that a group of U.S. citizens could intervene in the case as defendants. Judge Tipton granted their request over the opposition of the red states, explaining that the U.S. citizens—all of whom are sponsoring someone to come to the United States for up to two years through the CHNV programs—“would provide important perspectives, substantial expertise, and experience that will aid the Court in its consideration of the issues.” Through their attorneys at JAC, RAICES and UCLA CILP, the seven U.S. citizens will defend the CHNV programs’ legality alongside the Biden Administration, including at the bench trial in Victoria, Texas that is now scheduled to begin on June 15.  

Nonprofits win reprieve on subpoenas, but LA & FL still want names of asylum seekers


Since our last report, the nonprofits who received subpoenas for the names of their asylum-seeking clients won a reprieve in the litigation over the asylum processing rule: after a hearing, Judge Joseph stayed (paused) enforcement of the subpoenas. Unfortunately, though, the danger to them and (especially) their clients remain: the red states and the Biden Administration are now briefing whether DHS should have to produce to the red states the identities of individual asylum seekers with potential residential ties to Louisiana or Florida. There is hearing on that motion on May 11; depending on how it is resolved, Judge Joseph could revisit the propriety of the subpoenas to the nonprofits.  

In related news, the Biden Administration has paused enforcement of the challenged asylum processing rule (which authorizes asylum officers to more quickly adjudicate asylum requests), reportedly to better prepare for the end of Title 42 (which is expected on May 11). Let’s hope the pause is truly temporary, as DHS has said. 

Texas seeks to enjoin feds from enforcing $1.7 trillion appropriations law 

In early April, Texas filed a motion to preliminary enjoin (block) the federal government from enforcing an appropriations bill enacted in December, claiming that the House of Representatives did not have a quorum when it passed the bill because some members utilized its COVID-related rules authorizing proxy voting. Texas alleges that it is injured by two relatively small provisions of the bill: new legal protections for pregnant and post-partum employees and a $20 million appropriation (approximately 1/1000th of 1 percent of the bill’s total) to DHS’s Alternatives to Detention program. Notwithstanding its relatively narrow claimed injuries, Texas seeks a court order prohibiting the federal government defendants from enforcing any part of the $1.7 trillion bill. Given everything that the bill is funding, the possible consequences of a Texas win are staggering. Briefing on the motion should be complete by late May. 

* * * * *

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