Gibbons Reps Asylum Seekers in $6M Suit Over 2018 ‘Inhumane’ Immigration Policy
This complaint was first surfaced by Law.com Radar, ALM's source for immediate alerting on just-filed cases in state and federal courts. Law.com Radar now offers state court coverage nationwide. Sign up today and be among the first to know about new suits in your region, practice area or client sector.
January 24, 2025 at 03:52 PM
3 minute read
A $6 million lawsuit was filed in New Jersey federal court Thursday over the prior Trump administration's 2018 Family Separation Policy that forcibly separated a 3-year-old boy from his parents while he underwent heart surgery.
Takeaway: Since President Donald Trump took office on Monday, his immigration policies have taken center stage. The present lawsuit stems from his first-term policy that separated families at the border, according to a lawsuit filed this week by attorneys with Gibbons, Kirkland & Ellis, and others. Lawsuits over this policy have been relatively rare.
Court: New Jersey, U.S. District Court
Case Type: Personal Injury
Industry: Government and immigration
Lawyers: The plaintiffs are represented by Anne M. Collart of Gibbons; Amanda Lamothe-Cadet and Maylynn Chen of Kirkland & Ellis; and Elizabeth Jois, Kate L. Fetrow and Genesis Miranda of the N.Y. Legal Assistance Group.
Liability Arguments: The plaintiffs are a father and son, identified as D.R.M. and J.J.R.S. in the complaint, who arrived in the U.S. to seek medical treatment for the 3-year-old’s congenital heart defect in March 2018. They alleged that they were detained in inhumane conditions and that an immigration agent threw away the child’s heart medication. The toddler was then separated from his father, who was deported to Honduras. The child was sent to foster care in the Bronx and underwent heart surgery without his parents.
“The explicit purpose of the policy was to inflict trauma on families like D.R.M. and J.J.R.S. who enter the United States without documentation, in order to deter other families from coming,” the complaint said. "Accordingly, plaintiff's mental and emotional distress was a foreseeable and intended consequence of their separation.”
The complaint cited a June 2018 decision by U.S. District Judge Dana M. Sabraw of the Southern District of California that held that the family separation policy likely violated the constitutional rights of families seeking asylum. Sabraw ultimately issued a decision in the case, Ms. L. v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, including a classwide preliminary injunction prohibiting the Department of Homeland Security from separating families subject to certain exceptions, and ordering reunification to take place.
Damages Arguments: The complaint alleged that the government achieved its objective through its unconstitutional policy of inflicting emotional distress on families. The lawsuit included claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, loss of consortium, and tortious interference with familial relationships. The suit sought $3 million in compensatory damages both father and son.
What the lawyers are saying: The plaintiffs' counsel did not immediately respond to requests for comment. A request for comment sent to the U.S. Department of Justice was not immediately returned.
Radar scan: There's been no shortage of litigation over Trump's latest executive orders that denies birthright citizenship to children born in the U.S. On Thursday, a federal judge blocked the executive order, calling the directive "blatantly unconstitutional."
Caption: D.R.M. v. United States
Date filed: Jan. 23, 2025
Judge: Unassigned
Read the complaint here.
This complaint was first surfaced by Law.com Radar, ALM's source for immediate alerting on just-filed cases in state and federal courts. Law.com Radar now offers state court coverage nationwide. Sign up today and be among the first to know about new suits in your region, practice area or client sector.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 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 AllLawyers' Phones Are Ringing: What Should Employers Do If ICE Raids Their Business?
6 minute readHours After Trump Takes Office, Democratic AGs Target Birthright Citizenship Order
4 minute read'I've Worked Until 2 in the Morning': Lawyers Brace for Trump Policy
6 minute readNorris McLaughlin Backs Paterson Diocese in Fight Over Immigrant Priests
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 2Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 3Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
- 4Lawyers' Phones Are Ringing: What Should Employers Do If ICE Raids Their Business?
- 5Freshfields Hires Ex-SEC Corporate Finance Director in Silicon Valley
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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