Attorneys Use First Amendment Argument to Halt Deportation of Pregnant Immigrant
The outcome of the case could have broader implications for conditions at federal immigrant detention centers and the due process rights of undocumented immigrants.
July 01, 2019 at 03:44 PM
5 minute read
Attorneys for Alma Centeno Santiago, an undocumented pregnant woman detained in Queens this year, were able to halt her deportation last week with an unusual argument for such a case—that the federal government was violating her free speech rights under the First Amendment.
They'll now make the same argument, among others, in federal court Tuesday in an effort to keep Santiago in the country and have her released from federal detention.
The outcome of the case could have broader implications for conditions at federal immigrant detention centers and the due process rights of undocumented immigrants. Santiago has claimed that, while in federal custody, she's been denied medical care and basic necessities.
She's represented by attorneys with the New York Legal Assistance Group, an organization that provides free civil legal services to low-income residents. They were able to secure a temporary restraining order against her deportation last week, which they're trying to extend.
The case will be heard by U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter Jr. of the Southern District of New York. It's gained more attention in recent weeks from a handful of the state's elected officials, like U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-New York and Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-New York.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, said in a statement that Santiago was slated for deportation because she failed to appear for immigration court proceedings more than a decade ago. They also noted that she's had two criminal convictions in the past two years.
“Alma Centeno-Santiago is an illegally present Guatemalan national who has two criminal convictions in the United States stemming from arrests in September 2018 and April 2019,” the statement said. “A detainer was lodged with local authorities at the time of both arrests; however, local law enforcement did not honor the detainer and released her on both occasions without notification to ICE.”
That's when federal immigration authorities staked out a state courthouse in Queens and arrested Santiago outside the building nearly four months ago. She's been in federal custody since.
It's been an unusual case, compared to the thousands of others involving immigrants slated for deportation in recent years. For one, Santiago is three months pregnant. She's claimed that, since she was detained in April, federal immigration authorities haven't provided any of the necessary medical care for her pregnancy.
“She's had a very difficult pregnancy in detention and has not received proper medical care,” said Jodi Ziesemer, one of Santiago's attorneys. “She's concerned, and we're concerned, about the viability of this pregnancy given how poorly she's been treated with her lack of access to medical care while in detention.”
If anyone's going to be familiar with cases similar to what Santiago was gone though, it's Ziesemer. She's the director of the Immigrant Protection Unit at NYLAG, which helps immigrants with civil legal proceedings.
Despite repeated requests from Santiago, according to Ziesemer, federal immigration officials have denied her access to an OB-GYN. She's had acute medical problems, like vomiting and bleeding, but hasn't seen a doctor as of yet.
“They've also been doing other things, like denying her food, denying her water, keeping her in isolation, criticizing her for speaking out,” Ziesemer said.
Ziesemer said she suspects some of that treatment is, in part, retaliation for Santiago speaking publicly about what she's experienced while in detention. That's where the First Amendment argument comes in.
Santiago, last week, was transferred to a detention facility in Louisiana after spending months detained in New Jersey. The federal government was set to deport her, and that seemed imminent, until her attorneys stepped in. They argued that ICE was speeding up her deportation to keep her from speaking further about her experience in federal custody.
“We argued that ICE, the government, was infringing on her First Amendment rights because she has been speaking out to the press and to elected officials about both her lack of medical care in detention and the general poor conditions of detention,” Ziesemer said. “Because of that, we feel that ICE is expediting her removal and fast-tracking her for deportation because of her exercise of her First Amendment rights.”
They're seeking two things in court Tuesday: for Santiago to be released from detention and for her deportation to be paused until she's heard by an immigration judge. Ziesemer said the case is another example of how federal courts will assess what level of due process should be afforded to immigrants before deportation. In Santiago's case, there wasn't much, she said.
“I think this may have some implications in terms of many, many thousands of other cases, especially since this administration has specially said they want to target people in Alma's situation — people who never actually went to court and were ordered deported by a judge without them being present,” Ziesemer said.
ICE said Santiago's deportation was based on her failure to show up to immigration proceedings in 2004, but Ziesemer said she never got the notice to appear. ICE has countered, saying they were only required to send her the notice, not follow up in any way.
Arguments from both parties are scheduled for a hearing in Manhattan on Tuesday morning.
READ MORE:
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 AllRetired Judge Susan Cacace Elected Westchester DA in Win for Democrats
In Eric Adams Case and Other Corruption Matters, Prosecutors Seem Bent on Pushing Boundaries of Their Already Awesome Power
5 minute readEric Adams Trial Set for April as Defense Urges Dismissal of Bribery Count
Major Drug Companies Agree to Pay $49.1 Million to 50 States, Territories
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 111 Red State AGs Demand Damages in Antitrust Lawsuit Shaming ESG Climate Investors
- 2In-House Moves of Month: Discover Fills Awkward CLO Opening, Allegion GC Lasts Just 3 Months
- 3Delaware Court Holds Stance on Musk's $55.8B Pay Rescission, Awards Shareholder Counsel $345M
- 4'Go 12 Rounds' or Settle: Rear-End Collision Leads to $2.25M Presuit Settlement
- 52 Federal Judges Rescind Senior Status After Trump Win. Might More Follow?
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