Category: Lawyers

Latest DACA Decision from Texas District Court, DACA Lives!

Federal District Court Judge Andrew Hanen issued a 117 page Memorandum Opinion and Order today in regards to the State of Texas and other States attempt to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program. 18.08.31Texas Order Denying PI  Many expected the decision to call for an end to the DACA program, however Judge Hanen stated that Texas and other states essentially took too long to file the lawsuit.

Judge Hanen did cast great doubt on the future of DACA, stating that he believes the program was enacted in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and finding that the states were harmed by the program. However, given so many people relied on the program and Texas took years to file suit, he did not grant the preliminary injunction. He also issued a separate order allowing either party to appeal the case to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. Judge Hanen essentially is wanting the higher courts to issue ruling on the different legal theories so that everyone across the nation can have one unified policy. Currently the majority of District Court Judges have ruled that the DACA program must continue, however others have not. Ultimately the United States Supreme Court will decide the case after the separate cases make their way through their respective Courts of Appeals.

Immigration and Criminal Attorney Ray Ybarra Maldonado, of the Ybarra Maldonado Law Group, breaks down the Judge’s Ruling and describes what he believes will happen next with DACA.  To be updated of future videos following the Ybarra Maldonado Law Group on Facebook.

Abogado Ray quoted in NPR segment about Government failing to meet Court imposed Deadline

Abogado Ray Ybarra Maldonado was quoted in an NPR segment about the Federal Government’s lack of effort in reuniting children with their parents. The segment, titled Migrant Family Reunifications Continue As Deadline Nears, states that the deadline for the government to reunited the children is July 26.  In a Facebook Live video, Abogado Ray Ybarra Maldonado goes into further detail about the government’s lack of progress in complying with the Federal Judge’s Order.  The status report was filed by both the Government and the American Civil Liberties Union on July 19, 2018.

  • Key points: 2,551 total children are class members

In total, 2,551 children were taken from their parents and placed in a facility separate from their parents. The parents remained in immigration custody, where transferred to U.S. Marshall custody for a federal criminal charge, or were sent to state custody for a pending arrest warrant.  Most common was to take the parents to federal court to charge them with the crimes of illegal entry (8 USC 1325) or illegal reentry (8 USC 1326). After they were given a criminal conviction they were then sent back to immigration custody.

  • Only 1,606 possibly eligible, of this only 848 have been interview and cleared for reunification.

This means that just over half of those deemed eligible by ICE have actually been interviewed to be reunified. This means the government has an extremely large amount of interviews to still complete and only a very small timeframe in which to do that.

  • Potential Class Members not eligible, 91 with prohibitive criminal record or deemed ineligible

Without explanation of the criteria used, the federal government is claiming 91 people have a criminal record which would prohibit them from being a member of the class or getting their child back. The ACLU asked for the criteria but as of the filing of the memo the federal government would not disclose what types of convictions or arrests would disqualify someone from being able to get their child back into their custody.

  • 136 waived reunification

It is difficult to believe that 136 people chose not to be reunited with their children. The government likely lacks any video recording of these alleged waivers signed by individuals. Nobody knows if the waivers were attained with consent or the people were simply told to sign on the dotted line or lied to about what they were signing.

  • Total Number of reunifications 346

A very small percentage given the extremely large number of families that still need to be reunited.

Please like our Facebook Page, Ybarra Maldonado Law Group, to be able to watch any future videos on this issue.

<iframe src=”https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fray.ybarra%2Fvideos%2F10155940740809132%2F&show_text=0&width=560″ width=”560″ height=”315″ style=”border:none;overflow:hidden” scrolling=”no” frameborder=”0″ allowTransparency=”true” allowFullScreen=”true”></iframe>

DACA case back at 9th Circuit

Abogado Ray Ybarra Maldonado provides an update on recent development on DACA case at 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

On March 15, 2018 the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issued an order in the pending DACA case, Regents of the University of California, et. al, v. Department of Homeland Security et. al.  As previously reported the United States Supreme Court rejected the Trump Administration’s attempt to bypass the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The order from the 9th Circuit on March 15 granted in part and denied in part a motion to expedite proceedings.  The Court granted the motion to expedite having the case placed in front of a panel, and asked the Clerk of the Court to assign to a random panel as early as May of 2018.  The Court denied ordering that a decision from this panel also be expedited, however, either party can ask the panel to expedite their decision once they know who is assigned to the case.

This means that a decision from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals could come as early as May or June of this year. If the decision overturns the Northern District Court of California’s Preliminary Injunction, this could mean that USCIS could stop accepting DACA renewal applications. It is unclear how USCIS would proceed given that one Judge in New York has also previously ordered USCIS continue accepting renewal applications.

Given Congress’s absolute neglect of the Dream Act, the results of the Court decisions are extremely important. Just yesterday Trump stated he was upset with Democrats for not including Dreamers and his wall in the latest budget.  Obviously this was simply a political stunt and he had no intention of shutting down the government to support Dreamers. Both major political parties need to stop using Dreamers as a political football and instead pass a clean Dream Act.

Workers Request Immediate halt to Arpaio’s Workplace Raids Pending Outcome of Court Case

Originally posted on: aclu.org
August 7, 2014

Plaintiffs Ask Court for a Preliminary Injunction of Enforcement of State Laws on which Raids are Based

August 7, 2014

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: 212-549-2666, media@aclu.org

PHOENIX – Workers with the immigrant rights group Puente—joined by the Reverend Susan Frederick-Gray and lawyers with the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, the University of California, Irvine School of Law’s Immigrant Rights Clinic and the Law Office of Ray A. Ybarra Maldonado—today asked a federal court to stop the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) and the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office (MCAO) from using two contested state felony identity theft laws that target immigrant workers pending the outcome of the group’s constitutional challenge.

The class-action lawsuit, Puente Arizona v. Arpaio, was filed by the groups in June. It challenges Maricopa County’s enforcement of two state laws passed by Arizona legislators in 2007 and 2008 that turn immigrants into felons for working to provide for their families. Since then, MCSO has arrested over 790 workers under the laws.

“Our members go to work, knowing that they might not make it home if Arpaio and Montgomery decide to strike with another raid. We can’t wait any longer for the raids to stop. Every day that MCSO and MCAO unfairly target our communities is a day too long. We need immediate relief from the harm that the raids are causing,” said Carlos Garcia of the plaintiff organization Puente.

“Plaintiffs are entitled to a preliminary injunction to halt enforcement of these unjust and unconstitutional laws. MCSO and MCAO cannot violate workers’ rights with impunity, and we expect the Court to soon make that ruling,” said attorney Jessica Karp Bansal with the National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON), which is representing plaintiffs.

“The only reason I don’t have a DACA work permit now is because I was arrested in a raid while working to pay for my application. I was kept in Arpaio’s jail for three months, away from my family, without knowing what would happen to me.  I don’t think anyone else should have to go through what I went through because of Arpaio and Montgomery,” said Noemi Romero, a Puente member who provided a statement in support of the group’s request.

“We will continue to fight state and local officials who reject the best of what this country should stand for,” said Dan Pochoda, Legal Director of the ACLU of Arizona and co-counsel for plaintiffs. “This lawsuit is a needed antidote to the clamor for more deportations and the sacrifice of constitutional rights in the process.”

Additional plaintiffs in the case include Glendale resident Sara Cervantes Arreola and Phoenix resident Guadalupe Arredondo. The suit alleges that two Arizona statutes, A.R.S. § 13-2008 and § 13-2009, are preempted by federal law and violate the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. A full list of attorneys on the case includes Professors Annie Lai and Sameer Ashar of the UCI Law Immigrant Rights Clinic; Jessica Karp of NDLON; Dan Pochoda of the ACLU Foundation of Arizona; and Ray Ybarra Maldonado of the Law Office of Ray A. Ybarra Maldonado.

Plaintiffs’ proposed brief in support of their request for a preliminary injunction can be downloaded here.

Interviews with plaintiffs and attorneys are available upon request.