Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.
LexisNexis® CLE On-Demand features premium content from partners like American Law Institute Continuing Legal Education and Pozner & Dodd. Choose from a broad listing of topics suited for law firms, corporate legal departments, and government entities. Individual courses and subscriptions available.
P.J.E.S. v. Wolf, Nov. 18, 2020
"Plaintiff P.J.E.S., a 15-year-old minor from Guatemala who entered the United States as an unaccompanied minor in August 2020, brings this action against Chad F. Wolf in his officialcapacity as Acting Secretary of Homeland Security and various other federal government officials (“Defendants” or the “Government”) for violations of the Administrative Procedure Act(“APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 701 et seq.; the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (“TVPRA”), 8 U.S.C. § 1232; the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”), 8 U.S.C. § 1101 etseq.; and the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (“FARRA”), 8 U.S.C. § 1231 NOTE.
Pending before the Court are Plaintiff’s motion for class certification (“Pl.’s Cert. Mot.”), ECF No. 21, and motion for a classwide preliminary injunction (“Pl.’s Prelim. Inj. Mot.”), ECF No. 15. Magistrate Judge Harvey’s Report and Recommendation (“R. & R.”) recommends that this Court provisionally grant the motion for class certification and grant the motion forpreliminary injunction and . See R. & R., ECF No. 65 at 2.
The Government has objected to several of Magistrate Judge Harvey’s recommendations. See Gov’t’s Objs., ECF No. 69. Raising no objections to the R. & R., Plaintiff asks this Court to adopt Magistrate Judge Harvey’s recommendations to grant both motions. See Pl.’s Resp. to Pl.’s Objs. (“Pl.’s Resp.”), ECF No. 72 at 7. Upon careful consideration of the R. & R., the Government’s objections, Plaintiff’s response, and the relevant law, the Court hereby ADOPTS the R. & R., ECF No. 65, PROVISIONALLY GRANTS Plaintiff’s (1) Motion to Certify Class, ECF No. 2, and GRANTS Plaintiff’s (2) Motion for Preliminary Injunction, ECF No. 15.
... The Government’s request to stay the Court’s Order while it decides whether to appeal and/or pending appeal is DENIED for substantially the same reasons as those articulated in this Opinion."