Rodriguez v. Robbins

Case Information

Full Name : Alejandro Rodriguez, Abdirizak Aden Farah, Yussuf Abdikadir, Abel Perez Ruelas, Jose Farias Cornejo, Angel Armando Ayala, for themselves and on behalf of a class of similarly-situated individuals v. Eric Holder, United States Attorney General; Janet Napolitano, Secretary, Homeland Security; Thomas G. Snow, Acting Director, Executive Office for Immigration Review; Timothy Robbins, Field Office Director, Los Angeles District, Immigration and Customs Enforcements; Wesley Lee, Officer-in-Charge, Mira Loma Detention Center; Sandra Hutchens, Sheriff of Orange County; Officer Nguyen, Officer-in-Charge, Theo Lacy Facility; Captain Davis Nighswonger, Commander, Theo Lacey Facility; Captain Mike Kreuger, Operations Manager, James A. Musick Facility; Arthur Edwards, Officer-in-Charge, Santa Ana City Jail; Russell Davis, Jail Administrator, Santa Ana City Jail

Case Number : CV 07-3239

Court : United States District Court for the Central District of California

Judge : Hon. Terry J. Hatter

Co-Counsel : ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project; Stanford Law School Immigrants’ Rights Clinic; Sidley Austin LLP

Rodriguez v. Robbins is a class action lawsuit seeking to establish that immigrants whom the government has detained for more than six months while their cases remain pending deserve the most basic procedural right – a right to a hearing where they can argue for release on bond.

Alejandro Rodriguez was brought to the United States before his first birthday.  He lived in the U.S. his whole life before the government tried to deport him based on minor theft offenses.  He was detained for nearly three years while he fought to win his case.  He eventually did, and now lives in the Southern California area — but he will never get back the three years of his life that he lost in immigration detention.

The Obama administration continued the policy of denying simple relief to thousands of detainees across the country, including several hundred in the Los Angeles area. The case seeks to stop such travesties of justice, which continue to occur every day in our nation’s immigration detention centers.

Case Developments

RULING
April 16, 2013

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the District Court order requiring bond hearings for detainees who have been locked up for six months or longer.

RULING
August 8, 2013

The District Court grants summary judgement and orders a permanent injunction requiring bond hearings for all detainees who have been incarcerated for more than six months. Read the ruling

FILING
June 25, 2013

The ACLU filed a motion to compel the government to disclose information about bond hearings involving immigration detainees. Read the motion

RULING
April 16, 2013

Then 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that immigrants who have experienced prolonged detention have a right to a bond hearing to determine whether or not they should continue to be detained. Read the opinion.

RULING
September 13, 2012

The District Court grants a preliminary injunction ordering bond hearings for all mandatory detainees and detained asylum seekers who have been detained for at least six months. Read the ruling.

UPDATE
May 3, 2012

The court orders the government to disclose critical information concerning class members. Read the ruling.

FILING
October 22, 2010

The complaint tells the story of several detainees subject to prolonged detention without bond hearings in the Southern California area. Read the complaint.

RULING
January 4, 2010

The Ninth Circuit ordered that the ACLU and its co-counsel could represent a class of immigration detainees held for months, and often years, without bond hearings.  The ruling also paved the way for other class actions brought to defend the rights of immigrants. Read the ruling.