American Immigration Council v. United States Citizenship and Immigration…
American Immigration Council v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
- Donna Ryu
- 4:20-cv-03266
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 4
In American Immigration Council v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Judge Ryu vacated and continued the case-management conference to December 7, 2022.
The plaintiffs and federal defendants in the Freedom of Information Act case, particularly Customs and Border Protection regarding the requested daily situational reports.
What happened
American Immigration Council, the American Immigration Lawyers Association, and Human Rights Watch sued several federal agencies under the Freedom of Information Act over four requests concerning the Migrant Protection Protocols.
After the Supreme Court’s decision concerning that program, the parties said the only remaining issue was Customs and Border Protection’s production of daily situational reports, subject to lawful redactions. They jointly asked to postpone the scheduled case-management conference and said plaintiffs would not seek attorney’s fees or costs.
Judge Donna Ryu ordered the conference vacated and continued to December 7, 2022, at 1:30 p.m., by videoconference from Oakland. The parties were ordered to file an updated joint case-management statement by November 30, 2022.
The detailed version
- American Immigration Council v. United States Citizenship and Immigration… · No. 4:20-cv-03266
- Donna Ryu
- Sept. 29, 2022
Background
The plaintiffs—American Immigration Council, American Immigration Lawyers Association, and Human Rights Watch—filed this Freedom of Information Act case concerning four requests for records about the Migrant Protection Protocols. The defendants are United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, United States Customs and Border Protection, and United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
The parties explained that, after the Supreme Court’s decision in a related case, they understood that the Migrant Protection Protocols would not be implemented going forward. They agreed that the only remaining issue was the plaintiffs’ request for documents containing daily situational reports from Customs and Border Protection. Customs and Border Protection agreed to provide the documents subject to appropriate Freedom of Information Act redactions. After production, the parties planned to meet and confer about any objections to the redactions and propose a briefing schedule for unresolved objections. The plaintiffs agreed not to seek attorney’s fees or costs.
Ruling
The parties jointly requested that the further case-management conference scheduled for October 5, 2022, be vacated and continued to December 7, 2022. Judge Donna Ryu granted that scheduling request as modified. The order set the conference for December 7, 2022, at 1:30 p.m., in Oakland by videoconference, and required the parties to file an updated joint case-management statement by November 30, 2022. The order did not decide the remaining document-production or redaction dispute.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.