Judge Denies Gitmo Lawyers' Bid to Block Requirement to Live at Camp Justice
The lawyers say the area they are required to live and work in at Guantanamo Bay could be contaminated and unsafe.
March 30, 2018 at 01:37 PM
3 minute read
A federal judge on Friday refused to force the Defense Department to provide defense attorneys alternative housing at Guantanamo Bay amid fears their current quarters are unsafe.
The four plaintiffs, U.S. Judge Advocate General's Corps and civilian lawyers who represent detainees before the military commission at Guantanamo, sued the Department of Defense, the U.S. Navy and the director of the Office of Military Commissions and Convening Authority last year, alleging they failed to properly investigate environmental hazards at Camp Justice.
The lawyers, who are assigned to work and sometimes live there, asked U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer of the District of Columbia for a preliminary injunction requiring the DOD to further investigate the alleged hazards and offer alternative living and working accommodations.
In denying the preliminary injunction, Collyer wrote that the plaintiffs failed to show a likelihood of success on their arguments because it appeared the department had “examined the relevant data and articulated 'a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made.'”
Collyer added that the plaintiffs failed to show they would suffer an irreparable injury without the injunction.
“While the alleged harm—risk of cancer—is no doubt 'great,' the record does not show that it is currently 'certain,' 'actual,' or 'imminent,'” Collyer wrote.
The judge also dismissed the plaintiffs' claims that the DOD unreasonably delayed the completion of a risk assessment and implementation of controls to address the hazards, as well as their request for a writ of mandamus requiring the department to finish both tasks, for mootness. She said the department fully completed its report, which is now public, as well as completed the appropriate implementations.
“Plaintiffs' argument does not overcome the fact that the actions sought in their complaint have been undertaken and, to the extent demanded, completed,” the judge wrote.
However, the judge denied the government's motion to dismiss with respect to the plaintiffs' allegation that the DOD violated the Administrative Procedures Act by arbitrarily and capriciously deciding Camp Justice is safe.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs, which include Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll's Dan Small and Johanna Hickman and Venable's Michael Davis and Margaret Fawal, were not available to comment Friday. The DOD declined to comment since the case is ongoing.
The Navy assigns housing for military and civilian lawyers, as well as support staff, when they're working at Camp Justice. The camp is located on an old airfield last used in the 1970s.
In July 2015, a lawyer who worked at Camp Justice asked the DOD's inspector general to investigate whether conditions there may be linked to seven different cancer diagnoses of former employees. Later that year, the Miami Herald reported nine individuals who had worked there were diagnosed with cancer afterward.
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 All'Absurd Costs'?: Visa Faces Antitrust Class-Action Surge Following DOJ Complaint
3 minute read'Systemic and Pervasive'?: DiCello Levitt Alleges WWE Child Sexual Abuse Scandal
3 minute readThe 2024 NLJ Awards: Professional Excellence—Appellate Hot List
4th Circuit Revives Workplace Retaliation Lawsuit Against Biden's HHS Secretary
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Walking a Minute in Your Adversary’s Shoes: Addressing the Issue of 'Naive Realism' at Mediation
- 2The Moving Goalposts of Overtime Exemption: Texas Judge Invalidates 2024 Salary Threshold Rule
- 3New Research Study Predicts Continued Growth for Generative AI in Legal
- 4Litera Acquires Document Automation Startup Office & Dragons
- 5Patent Trolls Come Under Increasing Fire in Federal Courts
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