Young Immigrant Class Has Doubled in Lawsuit Over DHS Protected Status
Federal immigration officials now believe that more than 6,500 young, at-risk immigrants were denied special protected status after 2018 because of a policy change in how the Department of Homeland Security interpreted orders from New York State family courts when evaluating individual cases.
May 16, 2019 at 01:46 PM
3 minute read
Federal immigration officials now believe more than 6,500 at-risk adolescent immigrants in New York were denied special federal protected status following a change of Department of Homeland Security policy in 2018, according to court filings.
The figure is double what immigration advocates initially believed the class size to be, following an order in March by U.S. District Judge John Koeltl of the Southern District of New York that reestablished state family court orders as sufficient to meet federal requirements for those at-risk 18- to 21-year-olds seeking protected immigration status.
The information came in a letter filed May 15 with the district court arguing that an amendment to the proposed language defining qualifications for the class approved by Koeltl would unnecessarily burden federal officials by reopening more cases than was necessary.
In the letter, the office of U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman of the Southern District of New York addressed the push by attorneys for the immigrant class to open up reviews of cases that included orders from New York State family courts, rather than the current condition of decisions made “solely” on the basis of these state court orders.
As the letter from the Manhattan U.S. Attorney's Office noted, a recent teleconference with Koeltl showed the judge inclined to have this smaller subset of class cases that included, but weren't limited to New York family court orders, based on the relatively small estimate of 200 such cases.
After an internal review, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services found the number of cases—both the subset in dispute and the overall number of potential class members—to be far higher.
USCIS now estimates the subclass to be 552 cases where state family court orders were in the mix. The larger set of class members—young adults denied special status based on being abandoned by or at risk of harm if sent back to their families since 2018—jumped from advocate estimates of around 3,000 youth impacted to the federal government's estimate now of 6,658.
Attorneys representing the class of young immigrants impacted by USCIS's special immigration juvenile status—or SIJS—decisions expressed concern over the most recent filing from the federal government.
“We are shocked to learn that the Federal government relied upon an unlawful policy to deny critical humanitarian relief to over 6,600 immigrant youth in New York State alone,” Beth Krause, supervising attorney with the Legal Aid Society's Migrant Youth Project, said in a statement. “We hope that the Court will grant final relief, which will prevent the government from treating our clients and other vulnerable young people unlawfully.”
A DHS spokeswoman did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the new figures.
Related:
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 AllAttorneys 'On the Move': Structured Finance Attorney Joins Hunton Andrews Kurth; Foley Adds IP Partner
4 minute readNY Civil Liberties Legal Director Stepping Down After Lengthy Tenure
Former Top Aide to NYC Mayor Is Charged With Bribery Conspiracy
Trending Stories
- 1As 'Red Hot' 2024 for Legal Industry Comes to Close, Leaders Reflect and Share Expectations for Next Year
- 2Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 3Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 4Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 5Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
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