Hueston Hennigan Sues DHS and ICE to Revive Hotline for Detained Immigrants Featured on 'Orange Is the New Black'
The firm's lawyers write that in "the most perverse form of art imitating life imitating art" the government shut down free access to the hotline after it appeared in a plotline in the popular Netflix prison series.
December 10, 2019 at 05:05 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
A California nonprofit is suing the federal agencies that oversee immigration enforcement claiming that they illegally shut down free access to a hotline that allowed immigrants in detention to report abuse, find resources, and connect with loved ones.
Freedom for Immigrants (FFI), represented by lawyers at Los Angeles litigation boutique Hueston Hennigan, sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, claiming the agencies and federal officials retaliated against the organization after its hotline was featured in a plotline in the popular Netflix television series "Orange Is the New Black" this summer.
In the seventh season of the show, which began streaming on Netflix in July, one character provided another potentially facing deportation with a four-digit telephone extension to contact FFI's hotline for help. "You gotta be careful though," said the character providing the hotline number. "Apparently as soon as Big Brother figures out you're using the hotline, they shut it down."
Lawyers for the FFI, which has run the National Immigration Detention Hotline since December 2013, claim that the government's action is the "the most perverse form of art imitating life imitating art." Two weeks after the new season of the show began airing, they claim, the government pulled the plug on free access to the hotline.
"ICE's shutdown of the hotline violates FFI's First Amendment rights to be free from retaliation for engaging in protected speech, and to speak freely to, and associate with, persons in immigration detention," wrote the organization's lawyers, led by Hueston Hennigan's Moez Kaba. "The shutdown also violates the First Amendment rights of detained immigrants, who, without the hotline, either are unable to contact FFI at all or can only do so by paying exorbitant fees, as calls can cost upwards of $1 a minute," they wrote.
Reached by phone Tuesday, Kaba said that as the son of immigrants, it was important for him to take on work for people who are held in detention. The complaint alleges a pattern of federal officials retaliating against FFI and its programs, which includes a national network of visitation programs at immigrant detainment facilities. The complaint claims that after officials with FFI have spoken out about the conditions immigrants face in detention in the past, immigration officials have limited the organizations access to those facilities. Kaba said that Christina Fialho, co-executive director of FFI, reached out to the firm to litigate after access to its free hotline was cut off.
"When it comes to taking cases all the way that's something that our firm really prides itself on," Kaba said.
Immigrant detainees formerly could dial *9233# for free access to volunteers who could help them file formal complaints about alleged abuses or attempt to locate family members from whom they'd been separated. According to Kaba, detainees are now forced to pay to call FFI, which has led the organization to buy prepaid phone cards and distributed them to detainment facilities across the country. Kaba says that ICE's explanation for the cutoff was initially that it was part of a routine pro bono audit, but officials have since shifted to accuse FFI of improperly arranging three-way calls and call forwarding. Kaba says that's something FFI trains operators specifically not to do—and something that isn't explicitly forbidden.
"Their shifting explanation shows there's no rational basis for their actions," Kaba says.
The firm is seeking an injunction reinstating the hotline and barring ICE and ICE officials from interfering with the First Amendment rights of the organization and detainees.
Representatives of DHS didn't respond to messages seeking comment Tuesday. A spokesperson for ICE declined to comment but pointed to prior comments that the allegation is simply not true, and the Enforcement and Removal Operations verified the pro bono speed dial for FFI was removed from the agency's pro bono list in October 2018, predating the TV show by nearly a year.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLitigators of the Week: After a 74-Day Trial, Shook Fends Off Claims From Artist’s Heirs Against UMB Bank
An ‘Indiana Jones Moment’: Mayer Brown’s John Nadolenco and Kelly Kramer on the 10-Year Legal Saga of the Bahia Emerald
‘It's Your Funeral’: Avoiding Doing Damage to Your Client’s Case With Uncivil Behavior
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250