WASHINGTON, D.C. - A District of Columbia federal judge on Oct. 27 certified a class of enlisted people who are not yet citizens of the United States and are suing the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), the U.S. Citizen and Immigration Service (USCIS) and government officials for delaying their shipment to basic training or active-duty service until after the DOD's completion of enhanced security screening (Kusuma Nio, et al. v. United States Department of Homeland Security, et al., No. 17-998, D. D.C., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178200).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The American Civil Liberties Union filed a class complaint against federal government officials on Oct. 13 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, alleging that unaccompanied immigrant minors, many of whom have been sexually abused or assaulted, are being denied access to abortions in violation of their rights under the First and Fifth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution (Rochelle Garza, et al. v. Eric Hargan, et al., No. 17-2122, D. D.C.).
FRESNO, Calif. - A class complaint accusing an employer of suppressing wages by hiring undocumented immigrants was settled June 29 with no recovery for the class due to the defendant's negative net worth due to a multimillion-dollar judgment already entered against him and his lack of future job prospects (Robin Brewer v. Scott Salyer, No. 06-1324, E.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101374).
SEATTLE - A Washington federal judge on May 22 stayed a class suit filed by three minors objecting to President Donald J. Trump's immigration-related executive orders pending a ruling in Hawaii v. Trump, No. 17-15589 (9th Cir.) (Juweiya Abdiaziz Ali, et al. v. Donald Trump, et al., No. 17-135, W.D. Wash., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77656).
NEW YORK - A New York federal judge on Jan. 28 granted an emergency motion for stay of removal filed by two immigrants seeking to represent themselves and a class of individuals with refugee applications, holders of valid visas and other individuals from seven countries who are legally authorized to enter the United States in response to an executive order issued by President Donald Trump one day earlier changing the way certain non-citizens may enter the United States and imposing a 120-day moratorium on the refugee resettlement program (Hameed Khalid Darweesh, et al. v. Donald Trump, et al., No. 17-480, E.D. N.Y.).
JACKSON, Miss. - A panel of the Mississippi Court of Appeals on Dec. 13 affirmed a trial court's decision to not allow the attorneys of a plaintiff in a premises liability suit to refer to the man who attacked her as an "illegal immigrant" (Margaret Magers v. Diamondhead Resort LLC., No. 2015-CA-01330-COA, Miss. App.; 2016 Miss. App. LEXIS 793).
FORT MYERS, Fla. - Finding that a former judge may be able to assist a jury on procedures employed by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the U.S. immigration courts, a Florida federal judge on March 4 reserved ruling on a motion to exclude until trial (United States of America v. Yohany Hernandez-Hernandez, No. 15-59, M.D. Fla.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27737).
NEW YORK - An attorney claiming nonresponsiveness under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) failed to establish any bad faith or violations by the agency, a New York federal judge held Sept. 26, declining to conduct an in camera review of withheld documents and granting the agency's motion for summary judgment (John Assadi Esq. v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, No. 1:12-cv-01374, S.D. N.Y.; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137074).
SEATTLE - Eight immigrant children filed a class complaint July 9 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington alleging that they are being denied due process by being forced to represent themselves during deportation proceedings (J.E.F.M., et al. v. Eric H. Holder, Attorney General, United States, et al., No. 14-1026, W.D. Wash.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on March 10 declined to hear an appeal in a lawsuit over an employer's obligation to provide undocumented immigrants with minimum and overtime wages (Jerusalem Cafe, LLC, et al v. Elmer Lucas, et al., No. 13-682, U.S. Sup.; 2014 U.S. LEXIS 1863).
SAN FRANCISCO - A law firm will pay California $418,000 to resolve state unfair competition law (UCL) claims alleging that the firm collected large fees while its attorneys did little or no work on the clients' immigration cases, under a settlement filed Dec. 16 (The People of the State of California, et al. v. Guajardo, Martin, et al., Jamie Hernandez, et al. v. Guajardo, Martin, et al., Nos. 505449, 505450, Calif. Super., San Francisco Co.).
PHILADELPHIA - A Pennsylvania city's two ordinances that prohibit employment of illegal aliens and preclude them from renting housing in the city are preempted by federal immigration law, the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled July 26 (Pedro Lozano, et al. v. City of Hazleton, No. 07-3531, 3rd Cir.; 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 15256).
KANSAS CITY, Mo. -Unauthorized aliens may collect minimum and overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) because that federal law "does not allow employers to exploit any employee's immigration status or to profit from hiring unauthorized aliens in violation of federal law," the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled July 29 (Elmer Lucas, et al. v. Jerusalem Cafe, LLC, et al., No. 12-2170, 8th Cir.; 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 15320).
NEW YORK - The decision in Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. NLRB (535 U.S. 137 $(2002$)) prohibits undocumented aliens from recovering back pay even when those employees did not violate the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA), the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled July 10 (Christian Palma, et al. v. National Labor Relations Board, No. 12-1199, 2nd Cir.; 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 13911).
Welcome to the new LexisNexis Legal Newsroom. The LexisNexis Legal Newsroom delivers breaking news headlines, opinions, fast-turn analysis and more. This free Web site is the new and improved version of the LexisNexis Practice Area Communities and brings significantly increased coverage, more social media interaction and other enhancements.
The Legal Newsroom brings the number of practice areas covered up from 15 to more than 30, includes new jurisdictional options for select states, and introduces other significant enhancements. Emerging Trends features cover hot topics such as health care reform, immigration reform, and fracking and alternative energy. News headlines (which link through to Lexis.com or Law360), along with opinion and analysis, are delivered for more than 30 practice areas and several select jurisdictions.
Navigation is simple. From the home page, click on Select Your Topic to see the menu of practice areas, jurisdictions and emerging trends covered. Each page contains a feature story, news headlines and the latest commentary and analysis for that practice area or jurisdiction. Clicking the red house icon next to Select Your Topic brings you back to the home page.
The Legal Newsroom not only includes the best content and functionality from the Communities, it is updated several times throughout the day. We hope you enjoy the upgraded experience.
For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions, connect with us through our corporate site.
SANTA ANA, Calif. - A California federal judge on April 19 provisionally certified a class complaint challenging the constitutionality of Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and alleging that it prevents homosexual immigrants from receiving certain immigration benefits available to immigrants in heterosexual marriages (Martin R. Aranas, et al. v. Janet Napolitano, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, et al., No. 12-1137, C.D. Calif.).
SAN FRANCISCO - The California Supreme Court on March 20 declined to review a California unfair competition law (UCL) injunction against an immigration law firm and its shareholder that a lower court found regulated fraud and not the practice of law (The People ex rel. Dennis J. Herrera, as city attorney, etc. v. Christopher Stender, et al., No. No. S208570, Calif. Sup.).
PASADENA, Calif. - The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on March 14 upheld a district court's denial of an immigrant's mandamus petition in which he sought to compel the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) to issue him a Stafford loan, ruling that he did not provide any evidence that he was "in the United States for other than a temporary purpose" (Asil Mashiri v. Department of Education, et al., No. 10-56022, 9th Cir.; 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 5096).
SAN FRANCISCO - A city attorney's California unfair competition law (UCL) action against an immigration law firm and its sole shareholder seeks to regulate fraud, not the practice of law, a state appeals court held Dec. 4 (The People ex rel. Dennis J. Herrera, as city attorney, etc. v. Christopher Stender, et al., No. A131625, Calif. App., 1st Dist., Div. 2; 2012 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 8871).
ATLANTA - An Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent's testimony that photos constituted pornography is not governed by Federal Rule of Evidence 702, an 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel held Nov. 19 in affirming the expert's admission and the defendant's 140-year sentence for pornography (United States of America v. Robert Allan Cowan, No. 11-15989, 11th Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 23687).
LOS ANGELES - Shareholders could not show that directors in a company showed bad faith regarding the company's violations of immigration laws, a federal judge in California said July 31, dismissing the shareholders' derivative lawsuit for failure to show that presuit demand upon the board would have been futile (In re American Apparel, Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigation, No. 10-cv-06576, C.D. Calif.). View related prior history, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47026.
PHILADELPHIA - A panel of the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 16 vacated an order from the U.S. Bureau of Immigration Affairs (BIA) that called for the deportation of a Jamaican-born U.S. citizen who had committed bankruptcy fraud, holding that the loss the BIA premised its removal order upon did not actually occur (Nigel St. Ivan Singh v. Attorney General of the United States, No. 11-1988, Chapter 11, 3rd Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 7544).