McAleenan v. Vidal, et al.

Amended Lawsuit in New York Challenges Termination of DACA Program

McAleenan v. Vidal, et al. (formerly Batalla Vidal v. Baran, et al.)

Briefs, Memos, and Orders Filed with/Issued by the U.S. Supreme Court (from latest to earliest):

  • On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari Before Judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit: Brief in Opposition for Respondents Martín Jonathan Batalla Vidal, et al. (filed 12/17/18, PDF). “The government seeks an extraordinary and unwarranted intervention from this Court to save it from routine judicial process and decisions it does not like. … The preliminary injunction entered by the district court — a stay of which the government never sought below — does no more than preserve the status quo and creates no circumstances that justify the extraordinary procedural departure of certiorari before judgment. In contrast, for this Court to disrupt the status quo without ordinary appellate review, as the government urges, would upend the lives of hundreds of thousands of young people and their families, schools, workplaces, and communities.”

Briefs, Memos, and Orders Filed with/Issued by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (from latest to earliest):

  • Amended Memorandum and Order and Preliminary Injunction (filed 2/13/18, PDF). “[T]he court finds that a nationwide injunction is warranted …. First, it is hard to conceive of how the court would craft a narrower injunction that would adequately protect Plaintiffs’ interests. … Furthermore, there is a strong federal interest in the uniformity of federal immigration law. … Because the decision to rescind the DACA program had a ‘systemwide impact,’ the court will preliminarily impose a ‘systemwide remedy.’”
  • Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction (filed 12/15/17, PDF). “Unless this Court grants preliminary relief, DACA recipients, their families, and communities will suffer irreparable harm each day that Defendants’ unlawful actions are permitted to remain in place. The imminent harms facing Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff class warrant relief, and both the balance of equities and the public interest weigh in favor of granting it.”
  • Second Amended Complaint (filed 9/19/17, PDF). “Because Plaintiffs and other similarly situated individuals face the imminent loss of their eligibility for DACA status due to Defendants’ unlawful actions, Plaintiffs ask this Court to declare the termination of DACA unlawful and to enjoin its enforcement.”
  • Letter to Judge Garaufis requesting pre-motion conference about adding DACA-related claims (filed 9/5/17, PDF). “In light of today’s announcement by Attorney General Sessions and termination by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)  of the 2012 guidance establishing  Deferred  Action  for  Childhood  Arrivals (DACA), Plaintiffs seek leave to amend their complaint to add related claims and class allegations and to join additional parties, and, if necessary, to seek emergency or expedited relief.”
  • Amended Complaint (filed 9/29/16, PDF). “Mr. Batalla Vidal and [Make the Road New York] ask this Court to (1) declare that the February 2015 preliminary injunction entered in Texas v. United States does not apply to New York residents; (2) declare unlawful Defendants’ revocation of Mr. Batalla Vidal’s employment authorization, and those of other New York residents; (3) vacate and set aside the unlawful revocations and order the reinstatement of Mr. Batalla Vidal’s three-year employment authorization, and those of other New York residents; and (4) enjoin Defendants from revoking Mr. Batalla Vidal’s employment authorization, and those of other New York residents, on the basis of the injunction in Texas v. United States.”
  • Complaint (filed 8/25/16, PDF)