红杏视频

PHILADELPHIA 鈥� The Third Circuit Court of Appeals today denied the government permission to appeal the issue of where Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil鈥檚 habeas case should play out. Back in April, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey ruled that it is the proper venue for Mr. Khalil鈥檚 habeas petition, as he was detained there when the petition was filed. The government argued that the venue should lie in Louisiana 鈥� because that is where the government shipped Mr. Khalil and is unlawfully detaining him 鈥� and sought to appeal the district court鈥檚 ruling. In today鈥檚 order, the Third Circuit denied that request. As a result, the case will continue to proceed in the District of New Jersey. The circuit court judges who issued the denial included Judges Stephanos Bibas, a Donald Trump appointee, Thomas Hardiman, a George W. Bush appointee, and Arianna Freeman, who was appointed by Joe Biden. 鈥淚t is the fundamental job of the judiciary to stand up to this kind of government manipulation of our basic rights. We hope the court鈥檚 order sends a strong message to other courts around the country facing government attempts to shop for favorable jurisdictions by moving people detained on unconstitutional immigration charges around and making it difficult or impossible for their lawyers to know where to seek their immediate release,鈥� said Brett Max Kaufman, a senior counsel with the 红杏视频鈥檚 Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. 鈥嬧�婳n March 8, the Trump administration and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) illegally arrested and detained Mr. Khalil in direct retaliation for his advocacy for Palestinian rights at Columbia University. Shortly after, DHS transferred him 1,400 miles away to a Louisiana detention facility 鈥� ripping him away from his wife and legal counsel. While stuck in detention, he was forced to miss the birth of his first child. Mr. Khalil is represented by Dratel & Lewis, the Center for Constitutional Rights, CLEAR, Van Der Hout LLP, Washington Square Legal Services, the 红杏视频, the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU), and the 红杏视频 of New Jersey.

NEW YORK 鈥� A federal court in New York has granted a preliminary injunction blocking removals under the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) for people within that court鈥檚 judicial district. The case is G.F.F. v. Trump. The court today ruled that the presidential proclamation exceeds the scope of the Alien Enemies Act because there is no 鈥渨ar,鈥� 鈥渋nvasion,鈥� or 鈥減redatory incursion鈥� as required by the statute. It also held that the government鈥檚 protocols for providing notice to people about AEA designations are insufficient and violate due process. The ruling stems from a lawsuit filed by the 红杏视频 and New York Civil Liberties Union, in partnership with The Legal Aid Society, whose clients are plaintiffs in the litigation. The following is reaction to today鈥檚 ruling: 鈥淭he court joined several others in correctly recognizing the president cannot simply declare that there鈥檚 been an invasion and then invoke a wartime authority during peacetime to send individuals to a Gulag-type prison in El Salvador without even giving them due process,鈥� said 红杏视频 attorney Lee Gelernt, lead counsel who argued the case. 鈥淭he court said it loud and clear: Trump cannot rewrite, ignore, or supersede our laws to justify his lawless deportation agenda. Today鈥檚 ruling rightly affirms our class members鈥� constitutional rights to due process and rebukes Trump鈥檚 reckless invocation of a 1700s-era wartime law to deport people to a horrific, hellhole prison in El Salvador,鈥� said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union. 鈥淭oday's decision is a powerful affirmation of our clients鈥� fundamental right to due process,鈥� said Sayoni Maitra, supervising attorney in the Federal Immigration Law Unit at The Legal Aid Society. 鈥淭he court rightly affirmed that the government cannot use an archaic wartime statute, in the absence of war, to sidestep due process and summarily deport asylum seekers who are lawfully seeking protection. We will continue to fight for a system that respects constitutional rights, human dignity, and justice for all.鈥� The ruling is online here.

NEW YORK 鈥� The Second Circuit Court of Appeals will hear arguments tomorrow, May 6 at 10 a.m. on whether a federal judge鈥檚 order to transfer R眉meysa 脰zt眉rk to Vermont should be granted or further delayed. Ms. 脰zt眉rk, a former Fulbright scholar and current Tufts University Ph.D. student researching child development, has been held in a Louisiana detention center for over a month 鈥� all in retaliation for co-authoring an op-ed. On March 25, while on the phone with her mom, plainclothes Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents surrounded her in Somerville, Massachusetts and arrested her. For nearly 24 hours, Ms. 脰zt眉rk鈥檚 attorney was unable to locate her as ICE quickly and quietly moved her to three separate locations in three different states 鈥� including Vermont 鈥� before sending her to Louisiana. In early April, a federal judge in Massachusetts ruled that the challenge to ICE鈥檚 detention of Ms. 脰zt眉rk should continue in Vermont, not Louisiana. A Vermont judge later agreed that Ms. 脰zt眉rk鈥檚 federal case should continue in Vermont and ordered ICE to transfer her back to a Vermont facility by May 1. The government appealed on April 24. And last week, without ruling on the merits, the appeals court agreed to consider both the government鈥檚 request to keep her in Louisiana and her legal team鈥檚 opposition. Since she arrived in Louisiana, Ms. 脰zt眉rk has lived in a cramped room with poor ventilation and 23 other women for almost all hours of the day. In new filings in her federal court case in Vermont, she says she has suffered several asthma attacks that have 鈥渂ecome progressively harder to recover from鈥� while in detention. Whereas her attacks used to last between 5-15 minutes, they now can last up to 45 minutes. She is regularly exposed to asthma triggers including insect and rodent droppings, and is almost never exposed to fresh air. The new filings also describe difficulty receiving appropriate care in detention, including delays to receive medical care and dismissive comments from medical staff. She has suffered six weeks of a detention that is as harmful as it is unlawful. The Second Circuit will also hear arguments on Tuesday on the government鈥檚 motion to consolidate the cases of R眉meysa 脰zt眉rk and Mohsen Mahdawi, a move both students鈥� legal teams oppose. Ms. 脰zt眉rk is represented in immigration court by Mahsa Khanbabai and Marty Rosenbluth, and in federal court by Mahsa Khanbabai, the 红杏视频, 红杏视频 of Massachusetts, 红杏视频 of Vermont, CLEAR, and Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP. Audio access to the hearing is available here.  

***MEDIA ADVISORY*** TUESDAY, April 29, 2 p.m. ET: Federal Court Hearing in Lawsuit Challenging Trump鈥檚 Efforts to Shut Down Asylum at the Border WHAT: A federal court in Washington, D.C., will hear arguments in a lawsuit challenging President Trump鈥檚 proclamation aimed at completely shutting down asylum at the border, a move that puts thousands of lives at risk. The case is RAICES v. Noem. Under the 鈥�212(f)鈥� proclamation, which falsely cites an 鈥渋nvasion鈥� as justification to deny asylum protections expressly granted by Congress, families and individuals face return to countries where they are at grave risk of persecution and torture with no recourse. Trump鈥檚 action ignores protections put in place by Congress and backed by the courts for generations that ensure people have a chance to have their asylum claims heard. This proclamation also differs from Trump鈥檚 attempts to shut off asylum in his first administration because the recent move leaves no avenue open for people to seek asylum, even if they present themselves at official ports of entry. WHO: The 红杏视频, National Immigrant Justice Center, Center for Gender & Refugee Studies (CGRS), Texas Civil Rights Project, 红杏视频 of the District of Columbia, and 红杏视频 of Texas filed the class-action lawsuit on behalf of individual asylum seekers and three organizations that provide legal services to people seeking asylum but are unable to do so under this proclamation: the Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services (RAICES), Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center, and the Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project. The plaintiffs are seeking a permanent injunction against enforcement of the 212(f) proclamation. Judge Randolph D. Moss will preside. WHEN: Tuesday, April 29, 2 p.m. ET WHERE: U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia/Courtroom 8 333 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. Court media policy information is here and here.