Impact Litigation

NILA’s impact litigation in the federal courts seeks procedural or substantive change either to extend the rights of noncitizens or to eliminate systemic obstacles they or their immigration counsel routinely face. It includes affirmative suits in district court as well as select circuit level litigation that has the potential to establish the law for a region of the country; and amicus briefing to assist federal court judges in their consideration of key legal issues.

NILA’s Affirmative Litigation Docket

D.V.D. v. DHS (D. Mass.) – Certified national class action challenging DHS’ policy of deporting noncitizens to countries never previously raised as possible countries of removal without any notice or opportunity to contest removal based on a fear of persecution or torture. A practice alert about the case is available HERE.
Co-Counsel: Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, Human Rights First
Status: On March 28, 2025, the district court entered a temporary restraining order (TRO) blocking third country removals without notice and a meaningful opportunity to seek CAT protection. Defendants appealed the TRO and moved to stay it. The First Circuit denied Defendants’ motion to stay the TRO on April 7, 2025. Defendants also moved for an indicative ruling based on DHS policy guidance issued on March 30, 2025 in response to the TRO. On April 18, 2025, the district court certified a nationwide class and granted a preliminary injunction (PI). The First Circuit denied the Defendants motion to stay the PI on May 16, 2025. On April 30, 2025, the court amended the PI to state that DHS must afford the procedural protections in the PI prior to removing any class member from Guantanamo and prior to ceding custody or control to another entity in a manner that prevents provision of those protections. On May 7, 2025, following credible reports of a flight to deport class members to Libya in violation of the PI, the court ruled that any such deportations would violate the PI. On May 20, 2025, after credible reports of the deportations of class members to South Sudan, the district court found that Defendants had violated the PI and ordered a remedy. On May 24, Defendants filed a motion to reconsider the court’s rulings, which the court denied. Also on May 24, the court ordered Defendants to facilitate Plaintiff O.C.G.’s return to the United States.
On May 27, Defendants filed an emergency application to stay the PI with the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court granted the stay on June 23, 2025. Following an emergency motion by class counsel, the district court held that its remedial order remained in effect. Defendants then moved the Supreme Court to “clarify” its June 23 ruling. In the course of briefing that motion, the Solicitor General asserted for the first time, without evidence, that the State Department had “diplomatic assurances” from South Sudan. On July 3, the Supreme Court stayed the district court’s remedial order.
On July 9, 2025, ICE issued guidance implementing DHS’ March 30 Memo. On July 15, Plaintiffs filed a motion for partial summary judgment and motion for an indicative ruling on dissolution of the PI. On August 28, the district court granted Plaintiffs’ motion to dissolve the inoperable PI, but, on October 20, the First Circuit declined to remand the PI appeal for that purpose. However, following complete briefing on the PI appeal and after oral argument in early February 2026, the First Circuit reversed its position and remanded the appeal to the district court to dissolve the PI.
On February 25, 2026, the district court granted in part and denied in part Defendants’ motion to dismiss and granted Plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment on Plaintiffs’ main claims challenging DHS’ third-country removal policy. The court issued both declaratory relief and set aside DHS’ third-country removal policy, and temporarily stayed the decision. Defendants’ appealed and filed an emergency motion to stay the decision on March 5, 2026. Briefing on the stay motion was complete on March 10, 2026. On March 16, the First Circuit continued the temporary stay while it adjudicates the full stay motion. On March 16, the First Circuit continued the stay and set an expedited briefing schedule for the appeal. The appeal was argued on May 13, 2026, and the First Circuit issued its decision affirming the district court’s ruling in all but one aspect of the decision. Importantly, the Court affirmed the vacatur of DHS’ third-country removal policy and affirmed that DVD class members have a rights to meaningful notice and opportunity to contest any third-country designation. After confirmation that Defendants’ refused to comply with the First Circuit decision based on the March 16 stay order, Plaintiffs’ filed an emergency motion on September 23. The First Circuit granted the motion and dissolved the March 16 stay.
Defendants then sought an emergency stay of the First Circuit’s decision from the Supreme Court on September 24 and Plaintiffs filed an opposition on September 28. Stay briefing is here. The Court granted the stay on September 29. The Court also treated the stay application as a petition for writ of certorari, which it simultaneously granted on an expedited schedule. Argument will be heard in December 2026.

Key Documents:
+ District Court: Complaint, Draft 2001 Form, Draft 2020 Notice, & February 18, 2025 Directive
+ District Court: Order Granting Temporary Restraining Order & Memorandum on Plaintiffs’ Motion for TRO
+ District Court: Defendants’ Motion for an Indicative Ruling Under FRCP 62.1
+ DHS: March 30, 2025 Memo
+ District Court: Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for an Indicative Ruling and Index of Exhibits
+ First Circuit: Order Denying Emergency Motion to Stay TRO
+ District Court: April 18, 2025 Class Certification and Preliminary Injunction Order
+ First Circuit: Defendants’ Emergency Motion to Stay the PI Pending Appeal
+ First Circuit: Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Stay the PI Pending Appeal
+ District Court: Order Re: Disclosure of Identities and Flights
+ District Court: Order Amending Preliminary Injunction
+ District Court: Order Clarifying Preliminary Injunction
+ District Court: Discovery Order Re: TRO Violations
+ District Court: Briefing Order Re: Department of Defense — Plaintiffs’ Brief — Defendants’ Brief
+ First Circuit: Order Denying Emergency Motion to Stay the PI Pending Appeal
+ District Court: Memorandum on PI & Remedy for PI Violations
+ District Court: Declaration Orders Re: N.M. — South Sudan / Chain Refoulement – Notice of PI
+ District Court: Dkt. 118 – Memo Recapping PI Protections
+ District Court: Return Order – O.C.G.
+ District Court: Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration and Stay – Memorandum and Order Denying Motions
+ District Court: Ensign Declaration Attesting to Notifying DHS, DOS, DoD, and flight contractors of the PI
+ District Court: Order on Plaintiffs’ Emergency Motion (re: class members in Djibouti)
+ Supreme Court: Order Staying Preliminary Injunction (June 23, 2024)
+ Supreme Court: Order on Motion to Clarify (July 3, 2025)
+ ICE: July 9, 2025 ICE Guidance
+ District Court: Plaintiffs’ Memorandum in Support of Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (July 15, 2025)
+ District Court: Plaintiffs’ Reply In Support of Partial Summary Judgment and Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
+ District Court: Order Granting Plaintiffs Motion for an Indicative Ruling
+ First Circuit: Order Denying Remand to Dissolve the PI
+ First Circuit: Order Granting Remand to Dissolve the PI
+ District Court: Order Granting Summary Judgment, Adjudicating Motion to Dismiss, & Setting Aside DHS’ Policy
+ District Court: Final Judgment
+ First Circuit: Defendants’ Emergency Stay Motion & Exhibits
+ First Circuit: Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendants’ Emergency Stay
+ First Circuit: Defendants’ Emergency Stay Reply
+ First Circuit: Order Granting (Temporary) Stay Pending Adjudication of Full Stay Motion
+ First Circuit: Order Continuing Stay and Setting Expedited Appeal Schedule
+ First Circuit: Defendants’ Appeal Brief and Addendum
+ First Circuit: Plaintiffs’ Appeal Brief
+ First Circuit: Defendants’ Reply Brief
+ First Circuit: First Circuit Decision and Judgment
+ First Circuit: Order Dissolving Stay
+ Supreme Court: Order Granting Stay and Certiorari

Mansor v. USCIS (W.D. Wash.) – Certified nationwide class action ruling that USCIS’ failure to timely provide employment authorization documentation to noncitizens applying for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) violates the law.
Co-Counsel: Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, Kurzban Kurzban Tetzeli & Pratt, P.A.
Status: Counsel filed the complaint, motion for class certification, and a preliminary injunction motion (on behalf of the Named Plaintiffs) in March 2023. In August 2023, the court denied Defendants’ motion to dismiss except as to one Named Plaintiff. Also in August 2023, the court certified a national class. The parties then completed discovery and summary judgment (SJ) briefing. On February 10, 2025, Defendants notified the court that, as of February 4, USCIS had paused its streamlined case processing for adjudicating EAD applications and initial TPS applications in order to review the sufficiency of background checks. The court then ordered status reports and renoted the summary judgment motion. Finally, on December 1, 2025, the district court granted summary judgment in Plaintiffs’ favor. Defendants subsequently moved to alter or amend the judgment. The district court granted that motion and made clarifying amendments to its prior decision on March 16, 2026. Defendants initially appealed the district court’s summary judgment decision to the Ninth Circuit but the parties subsequently stipulated to voluntary dismissal in July 2026.
Documents:
+ Complaint
+ Order on Motion to Dismiss
+ Order Certifying National Class
+ Notice of Administrative Action
+ Order to Show Cause (Briefing Order)
+ Defendants’ Response to Order to Show Cause
+ Plaintiffs’ Response to Order to Show Cause
+ Order (February 18, 2025)
+ Defendants’ March 14 Status Report & McDermott Declaration
+ Order (March 17, 2025)
+ Defendants’ April 14 Status Report
+ Plaintiffs’ Response to Defendants’ April 14 Status Report
+ Order (April 16, 2025), Order (April 29, 2025), and Order (May 13, 2025)
+ Order Granting Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment and Judgment (Dec. 1, 2025)
+ Defendants’ Rule 59(e) Motion to Alter/Amend Judgment (Jan. 7, 2026)
+ District Order Granting Defendants’ Rule 59(e) Motion and Clarifying Prior Order and Judgment
+ Stipulation for Voluntary Dismissal of Ninth Circuit Appeal (July 1, 2026)
+ Ninth Circuit Order Dismissing Appeal (July 6, 2026)
+ Status Report & Exhibit A (Sept. 30, 2026)

Padilla v. ICE (W.D. Wash., 9th Cir., S. Ct.) – Certified national class action preserving the right to a bond hearing for asylum seekers who entered without inspection and passed a credible fear, seeking procedural protections in those proceedings, and challenging credible fear interview delays. See Practice Alert: Padilla v. ICE and Delays in Credible Fear Interviews (updated March 2024) for more information.
Co-Counsel: Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, ACLU, American Immigration Council
Status: On January 5, 2024, the district court approved a settlement agreement regarding the nationally certified Credible Fear Class, which challenged prolonged delays in providing credible fear interviews. In April 2024, Defendants reported that over 1,000 Credible Fear Class members were issued Notices to Appear and placed in regular removal proceedings in the first 90 days since the settlement agreement took effect.
As for the nationally certified Bond Hearing class, the Ninth Circuit vacated a prior injunction after the Supreme Court’s decision in Thuraissigiam. In December 2023, the district court denied, in large part, Defendants’ motion to dismiss the bond hearing class claims (in the Fourth Amended Complaint). On September 21, 2026, the Ninth Circuit ruled on the interlocutory appeal and held that the district court correctly allowed the Bond Hearing claims to move forward.
Documents:
+ Complaint
+ Class Certification Order (Bond Hearing & Credible Fear Classes) & Order Clarifying Bond Hearing Class Definition
+ Ninth Circuit Decision Re: Preliminary Injunction (Bond Hearing Class Only)
+ Supreme Court GVR Order & Ninth Circuit Remand Order & District Court Order Vacating Preliminary Injunction
+ Fourth Amended Complaint
+ Notice of Proposed Settlement & Proposed Credible Fear Class Settlement Agreement
+ Order on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Bond Hearing Class Claims)
+ Order Approving Settlement Agreement of Credible Fear Class Claims
+ Order Granting Interlocutory Appeal to the Ninth Circuit (Bond Hearing Class Claims)
+ Padilla CFI Class Compliance Report – April 18, 2024
+ Padilla CFI Class Compliance Report – Oct. 1, 2024
+ Padilla CFI Class Compliance Report – April 7, 2025
+ Padilla CFI Class Compliance Report – July 8, 2025
+ Padilla CFI Class Compliance Report – Oct. 8, 2025
+ Padilla CFI Class Compliance Report – Dec. 25, 2025
+ Padilla CFI Class Compliance Report – July 1, 2026
+ Ninth Circuit Decision on Interlucutory Appeal – September 21, 2026
+ Compliance Report – Sept. 30, 2026

Garcia Perez v. USCIS (W.D. Wash.) – Nationwide class action challenging policies and practices of USCIS and EOIR that prevent asylum seekers from obtaining work authorization, including EOIR and USCIS’ failure to provide notice of adverse “asylum EAD clock” determinations or a viable mechanism to challenge such determinations and clock stoppages when an applicant wins their case on appeal, files a change of venue, or when an unaccompanied child is waiting for USCIS to adjudicate their asylum application in the first instance.
Co-Counsel: Northwest Immigrant Rights Project
Status: The case was filed in June 2022. Following settlement negotiations, the parties filed a joint motion for class certification, joint motion for preliminary approval, the proposed settlement agreement and exhibits on July 29, 2024. That same day, the court granted the joint motion for class certification. On July 30, 2024, the court granted preliminary approval of the settlement. At a fairness hearing on September 26, 2024, the court approved the settlement agreement. NOTE: Prior to January 20, 2025, EOIR’s website had a page dedicated to listing the adjournment codes. Following the change in administration, that information was moved to the EOIR policy manual. The adjournment code information can be found on pages 627-38 (PDF pagination) of the revised EOIR manual.
Documents:
+ Complaint
+ Joint Motion for Class Certification
+ Joint Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlement Agreement
+ Proposed Settlement Agreement & Exhibits A-C
+ Order Granting Class Certification
+ Order Granting Preliminary Approval of Settlement Agreement and Setting Fairness Hearing
+ Class Notice – English
+ Class Notice – Spanish
+ Order Approving Settlement Agreement (Sept. 26, 2024)
+ Garcia Perez Settlement Webinar Slides (Oct. 2, 2024)
+ Practice Alert: Asylum EAD Clock Settlement Agreement FAQs: Garcia Perez v. USCIS

CLOSED IMPACT CASES

Sanchez Mora v. CBP (D.D.C.) – Putative national class action against CBP and DHS seeking to force CBP to timely comply with requests for individual records under the Freedom of Information Act. A similar lawsuit was filed in 2015 and the parties reached a settlement agreement.
Co-Counsel: Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, Van Der Hout LLP
Status: The complaint and motion for class certification were filed in April 2024 in the Northern District of California. An amended complaint was filed in August 2024. The case was transfered to the District of Columbia in November 2024 and DHS was dropped as a defendant. On June 18, 2025, the D.C. District Court reinstated DHS as a defendant to Plaintiffs’ policy or practice claim under the FOIA. Following briefing on class certification, Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, and Plaintiffs’ Rule 56(d) motion for discovery, the district court granted Defendants’ summary judgment motion, denied Plaintiffs’ discovery motion, and held that Plaintiffs’ class certification motion was moot.
Documents:
+ Amended Complaint
+ Order Reinstating DHS as a Defendant
+ Renewed Motion for Class Certification
+ District Court Decision

C.M. v. United States (D. Ariz.) – Action under the Federal Tort Claims Act seeking damages on behalf of five mothers and children subjected to the Trump Administration’s family separation policy.
Co-Counsel: Arnold & Porter LLP, Kairys, Rudovsky, Messing, Feinberg & Lin, National Immigration Justice Center, and American Immigration Council
Status: In March 2020, the district court denied the United States’ motion to dismiss. In October 2023, the court denied the United States’ motion for summary judgment. As to Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, the court granted the motion in part and denied it in part. The parties ultimately settled the case.
Documents:
+ Complaint
+ Order Denying Defendant United States’ Motion to Dismiss
+ Order Regarding Presidential Communications Privilege and Deliberative Process Privilege
+ Summary Judgment Order

H.M. v. Radel (C.D. Cal.) – Complaint challenging USCIS’ failure to adjudicate I-730 follow-to-join petitions filed by six Eritrean refugees to bring their spouses and children to the United States.
Status: The complaint was filed on December 30, 2021. After filing, USCIS adjudicated the petitions and plaintiffs’ filed a notice of voluntary dismissal in October 2022.
Documents:
+ Complaint
+ Notice of Dismissal

Gomez v. Jaddou (S.D.N.Y.) – Putative national class action challenging USCIS’ policy of making Temporary Protected Status holders ineligible to obtain green cards after their return from authorized travel abroad.
Co-Counsel: Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, Law Office of Stacy Tolchin
Status: The complaint was filed in November 2021. Following briefing on the government’s motion to dismiss, USCIS issued a Policy Alert rescinding the policy that was the subject of the lawsuit. After Plaintiffs received written confirmation from USCIS, through its counsel, that no putative class member would have Matter of Z-R-Z-C- applied to their case going forward, the parties voluntarily dismissed the action.
Documents:
+ Complaint
+ USCIS Policy Alert
+ FAQ Regarding Rescission of Matter of Z-R-Z-C-

Make the Road New York v. McAleenan (D.D.C., DC Cir.) – Challenging the expansion of expedited removal.
Co-Counsel: American Civil Liberties Union, American Immigration Council, Simpson Thatcher & Bartlett LLC
Status: On June 23, 2020, the DC Circuit reversed the district court’s decision enjoining the expansion. The parties then briefed and the argued a second preliminary injunction seeking to enjoin the expansion based on claims not previously addressed. DHS subsequently reviewed and rescinded the expansion. The rescission took effect on March 21, 2022. Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the action on June 3, 2022.
Legal Documents:
+ Order Enjoining Expansion of Expedited Removal
+ D.C. Circuit Decision on Preliminary Injunction
+ Second Amended Complaint

Vangala v. USCIS (N.D. Cal.) – Putative national class action challenging USCIS’ rejection of benefits applications filed by domestic violence survivors and asylum seekers for having a blank space on the application.
Co-Counsel: Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, Van Der Hout LLP
Status: The complaint and class certification motion were filed in November 2020. Soon thereafter, USCIS agreed to halt implementation of the policy while the parties engaged in settlement discussions. The district court approved the final settlement agreement on July 20, 2021. As a result of the lawsuit, USCIS will accept and adjudicate as timely filed over 60,000 applications denied under the policy.
Documents:
+ Complaint
+ Motion for Class Certification
+ FAQ and Updated USCIS Guidance
+ Final Settlement Agreement
+ Order Approving Final Settlement Agreement
+ Post-Settlement FAQ

Campbell Davis v. USCIS (E.D. Pa.) – Putative regional class action seeking immediate naturalizations for individuals who had their oath ceremonies cancelled or not scheduled due to the outbreak of COVID-19.
Co-Counsel: Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, Law Office of Stacy Tolchin, and Kairys, Rudovsky, Messing, Feinberg & Lin LLP
Status: Dismissed in July 2020 after USCIS naturalized Plaintiffs and 2,202 members of the proposed class.
Documents:

+ Complaint

+ Brief in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification

+ Notice of Dismissal

Doe v. Nielsen (D. Ariz.) – Successful challenge to unconstitutional conditions in CBP’s short-term detention facilities (known as “hieleras”).
Co-Counsel: Morrison & Foerster LLP, ACLU American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, National Immigration Law Center, Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area, American Immigration Council
Status: The District Court’s permanent injunction became final after all parties voluntarily dismissed their cross appeals. Plaintiffs continue to monitor implementation of the injunction.
Documents:

+ Order Granting Permanent Injunction

+ Judgment and Opinion in Favor of Plaintiffs

Moreno v. Nielsen (E.D.N.Y.) – Putative class action challenging USCIS’ policy of denying adjustment applications filed by TPS holders who initially entered without inspection.
Co-Counsel: Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, American Immigration Council
Status: Dismissed after the Supreme Court’s decision in Sanchez v. Mayorkas resolved the issue.
Documents:

+ Amended Complaint

+ Class Certification Motion

Amicus Briefs

NILA authors amicus briefs on issues within the expertise of their staff. Likewise, NILA signs onto select amicus briefs written by outside authors on issues important to the immigrants’ rights movement. To request amicus support from NILA or to ask NILA to sign onto an amicus brief, please email Trina Realmuto (trina@immigrationlitigation.org), Mary Kenney (mary@immigrationlitigation.org), and/or Kristin Macleod-Ball (kristin@immigrationlitigation.org).

National Immigration Litigation Alliance, Inc.
Email: info@immigrationlitigation.org
Tel: (617) 819-4649