Motion (2019-07-16)
- Date
- 2019-07-16
Summary
Plaintiffs' administrative motion to consider whether cases should be related, brought under Civil L.R. 3-12 and Civil L.R. 7-11 and filed July 16, 2019 as Document 115 in East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Trump, Case No. 3:18-cv-06810-JST, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. It asks that East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Barr, Case No. 3:19-cv-04073, be related to this earlier action, and states that counsel for defendants opposes the motion. It argues the two cases share the same four organizational plaintiffs, substantially the same defendants, and claims that an interim final rule on asylum eligibility violates 8 U.S.C. § 1158 and the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 553(b), (c), (d). The motion runs 8 pages, with a supporting declaration and a proposed order attached.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Full text
Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 115 Filed 07/16/19 Page 1 of 8
1 Lee Gelernt* Katrina Eiland (SBN 275701)
Omar C. Jadwat* Cody Wofsy (SBN 294179)
2 Anand Balakrishnan* Spencer Amdur (SBN 320069)
ACLU FOUNDATION Julie Veroff (SBN 310161)
3 IMMIGRANTS’ RIGHTS PROJECT ACLU FOUNDATION
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor IMMIGRANTS’ RIGHTS PROJECT
4 New York, NY 10004 39 Drumm Street
T: (212) 549-2660 San Francisco, CA 94111
5 F: (212) 549-2654 T: (415) 343-0770
lgelernt@aclu.org F: (415) 395-0950
6 ojadwat@aclu.org keiland@aclu.org
abalakrishnan@aclu.org cwofsy@aclu.org
7 samdur@aclu.org
jveroff@aclu.org
8
9 Attorneys for Plaintiffs
(Additional counsel listed on following page)
10
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13 East Bay Sanctuary Covenant; Al Otro Lado;
Innovation Law Lab; and Central American Case No.: 18-cv-06810
14 Resource Center in Los Angeles,
15 Plaintiffs, PLAINTIFFS’ ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION TO CONSIDER
16 v. WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE
RELATED, PURSUANT TO CIVIL
17 Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, in L.R. 3-12 AND CIVIL L.R. 7-11
his official capacity; William Barr, Attorney
18 General, in his official capacity; U.S. Department [IMMIGRATION ACTION]
of Justice; James McHenry, Director of the
19 Executive Office for Immigration Review, in his
official capacity; the Executive Office for
20 Immigration Review; Kevin McAleenan, Acting
Secretary of Homeland Security, in his official
21 capacity; U.S. Department of Homeland Security;
Ken Cuccinelli, Acting Director of the U.S.
22 Citizenship and Immigration Services, in his
official capacity; U.S. Citizenship and
23 Immigration Services; John Sanders,
Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border
24 Protection, in his official capacity; U.S. Customs
and Border Protection; Matthew Albence, Acting
25 Director of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, in his official capacity; Immigration
26 and Customs Enforcement,
27 Defendants.
28
Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 115 Filed 07/16/19 Page 2 of 8
1 Melissa Crow* Baher Azmy*
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER Angelo Guisado*
2 1101 17th Street, NW Suite 705 Ghita Schwarz*
Washington, D.C. 20036 CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
3 T: (202) 355-4471 666 Broadway, 7th Floor
F: (404) 221-5857 New York, NY 10012
4 melissa.crow@splcenter.org T: (212) 614-6464
F: (212) 614-6499
5 Mary Bauer* bazmy@ccrjustice.org
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER aguisado@ccrjustice.org
6 1000 Preston Avenue gschwarz@ccrjustice.org
Charlottesville, VA 22903
7 T: (470) 606-9307 Christine P. Sun (SBN 218701)
F: (404) 221-5857 Vasudha Talla (SBN 316219)
8 mary.bauer@splcenter.org Angélica Salceda**
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
9 FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN
10 CALIFORNIA, INC.
39 Drumm Street
11 San Francisco, CA 94111
T: (415) 621-2493
12 F: (415) 255-8437
Attorneys for Plaintiffs csun@aclunc.org
13 vtalla@aclunc.org
*Pro hac vice application forthcoming asalceda@aclunc.org
**Application for admission pending
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 115 Filed 07/16/19 Page 3 of 8
1 Plaintiffs in the East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Barr, Case No. 3:19-cv-04073 (N.D.
2 Cal.)—respectfully request that this case be related to this earlier filed action, East Bay Sanctuary
3 Covenant v. Trump, No. 3:18-cv-06810-JST (N.D. Cal.) pursuant to Civil L.R. 3-12. Counsel for
4 Defendants opposes this motion.
5 This case is the second time these same four organizational Plaintiffs have come to this Court
6 to challenge a new government policy barring asylum for certain migrants who travel to the United
7 States’ southern border. In November of 2018, these four organizational Plaintiffs filed East Bay v.
8 Trump to challenge Defendants’ interim final rule eliminating asylum for noncitizens who entered
9 the southern border between ports of entry. Now, the four organizational Plaintiffs challenge
10 Defendants’ new interim final rule eliminating asylum for noncitizens who arrive at or enter the
11 southern border without having first claimed asylum in any third country through which they
12 traveled en route to the U.S.
13 The two cases are related: they share parties, core legal issues, and facts. The Court in East
14 Bay v. Trump has issued two decisions addressing legal issues directly relevant to this action,
15 including the interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act’s asylum statute, at 8 U.S.C. §
16 1158, the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), and
17 questions of standing that Defendants are likely to raise again. See East Bay v. Trump, 349 F. Supp.
18 3d 838 (Nov. 19, 2018) (East Bay I); East Bay v. Trump, 354 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (Dec. 19, 2018) (East
19 Bay II).
20 Given the considerable judicial resources expended in East Bay v. Trump, and the overlap
21 between the parties, the legal claims, and their factual underpinnings, relation of the two cases is
22 warranted.
23 I. APPLICABLE STANDARD UNDER CIVIL L.R. 3-12
24 Under Civil Local Rule 3-12, an “action is related to another when: (1) the actions concern
25 substantially the same parties, property, transaction or event, and (2) it appears likely that there will
26 be an unduly burdensome duplication of labor and expense or conflicting results if the cases are
27 conducted before different Judges.” Civil L.R. 3-12(a).
28 Whenever a party knows or believes that an action may be related to an action which is or
1
Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 115 Filed 07/16/19 Page 4 of 8
1 was pending in the Northern District, said party “must promptly file in the earliest-filed case an
2 Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should be Related, pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-
3 11.” Civil L.R. 3-12(b). That motion must include: “(1) The title and case number of each
4 apparently related case; (2) A brief statement of the relationship of the actions according to the
5 criteria set forth in Civil L.R. 3-12(a).” Civil L.R. 3-12(d).
6 II. THIS CASE IS CLOSELY RELATED TO EAST BAY v. TRUMP
7 The two actions share parties, as well as the same causes of action, governing law, and
8 factual underpinnings. The new case, East Bay v. Barr, Case No. 3:19-cv-04073, is an action for
9 declaratory and injunctive relief brought by four organizations who challenge an interim final rule
10 denying asylum eligibility to noncitizens who enter or attempt to enter the southern border after
11 failing to apply for protection while in a third country through which they transited en route to the
12 United States. Plaintiffs challenge the lawfulness of this policy as violating the Immigration and
13 Nationality Act’s asylum statute and the APA. See East Bay v. Barr, Compl., Causes of Action at
14 29-31.
15 The earlier filed case, East Bay v. Trump, is likewise an action for declaratory and injunctive
16 relief brought by the same four organizations to challenge an interim final rule issued by the same
17 Defendants barring from asylum noncitizens who enter the southern border somewhere other than a
18 designated port of arrival. That case also challenges the lawfulness of the rule as violating the INA’s
19 asylum state and the APA.
20 The actions involve “substantially the same parties.” Civil L.R. 3-12(a). The organizational
21 Plaintiffs in the two cases are the same. Compare East Bay v. Trump Compl. ¶¶ 7-14 with East Bay
22 v. Barr Compl. ¶¶ 13-20. With one exception, the Defendants in both cases are the same. The
23 single exception is that President Trump is not named in this case. The remaining Defendants are
24 the same: the Department of Justice, Executive Office of Immigration Review, Department of
25 Homeland Security, United States Citizenship and Immigration Service, Customs and Border Patrol,
26 and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the corresponding agency heads are defendants in
27 both cases. Compare East Bay v. Trump Compl. ¶¶ 15-27 with East Bay v. Barr Compl. ¶¶ 21-32.
28 The central legal question in both cases is similar: whether Defendants’ new limitation on
2
Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 115 Filed 07/16/19 Page 5 of 8
1 asylum eligibility violates the asylum statute, 8 U.S.C. § 1158. Defendants issued both of their
2 asylum bans pursuant to the Attorney General’s authority to impose limitations and conditions on
3 eligibility for asylum that are “consistent with” § 1158, and to establish “conditions or limitations on
4 the consideration of an application for asylum” consistent with the Immigration and Nationality Act.
5 See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(b)(2)(C), (d)(5)(B). In both cases, Plaintiffs claim that the new policies are
6 not, in fact, “consistent” with § 1158, because Congress has spoken to the availability of asylum for
7 those individuals, including in the subsection heavily litigated in East Bay v. Trump, 8 U.S.C. §
8 1158(a)(1), which provides that a non-citizen “who is physically present in the United States or who
9 arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival . . . ), irrespective of such
10 alien’s status, may apply for asylum in accordance with this section.” Compare East Bay v. Trump
11 Compl. ¶¶ 101-106 (Claim 1) with East Bay v. Barr Compl. ¶¶ 101-106 (Claim 1). The East Bay v.
12 Trump Court has already interpreted the asylum statute in two separate opinions, and set forth
13 guiding principles on when the Attorney General may impose new “conditions” on asylum
14 eligibility. See East Bay I, 349 F. Supp. 3d at 856-859; East Bay II, 354 F. Supp. 3d. at 1112-13.
15 Moreover, as in the earlier case of East Bay v. Trump, Plaintiffs here also argue that the new
16 interim final rule illegally bypasses the notice and comment and grace-period requirements of the
17 APA. See 5 U.S.C. §§ 553(b), (c), (d). Compare East Bay v. Trump Compl. ¶¶ 107-110 (Claim 2)
18 with East Bay v. Barr Compl. ¶¶ 107-110 (Claim 2). Defendants have invoked the same “good
19 cause” and “foreign affairs” exceptions from the APA’s procedural requirements as cited in the
20 earlier case, and in fact, seek to rely on the same evidence to justify them. See Interim Final Rule
21 (“IFR”) at 43 (explicitly relying on “similar concerns and . . . similar conclusions” regarding a surge
22 of migrants as the “November 2018 interim final rule” to show good cause); 45-48 (citing on-going
23 negotiations with Mexico and Northern Triangle countries). Indeed, the preamble and discussion
24 accompanying the interim final rule at issue here cites repeatedly to the East Bay v. Trump case.
25 See, e.g., IFR at 42, 44, 47. Resolution of Plaintiffs’ APA claims will thus relate to issues of law and
26 fact twice considered by the East Bay v. Trump Court. See East Bay I, 349 F. Supp. 3d at 863; East
27 Bay II, 354 F. Supp. 3d at 1115.
28 Defendants will also likely raise the same standing and zone-of-interests defenses that have
3
Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 115 Filed 07/16/19 Page 6 of 8
1 been addressed in East Bay v. Trump. See East Bay I, 349 F. Supp. 3d at 852-853 (addressing Article
2 3 standing of Plaintiff Organizations), 854 (addressing zone of interests test). See similarly East Bay
3 II, 354 F. Supp. 3d at 1115-16. These questions present virtually identical issues because, not only
4 are the plaintiffs the same, but the Plaintiffs assert the same types of injuries. Compare East Bay v.
5 Trump Compl. ¶¶ 78-100 with East Bay v. Barr Compl. ¶¶ 109-136.
6 In sum, there is substantial overlap between the plaintiffs, the legal claims, and the factual
7 elements at issue in this case and in East Bay v. Trump. The East Bay Court issued two thorough
8 opinions addressing directly relevant issues. In light of the resources committed to understanding
9 the legal issues and the factual background in East Bay v. Trump, and the centrality of those issues in
10 each case, “there will be an unduly burdensome duplication of labor and expense” should East Bay
11 v. Barr not be assigned to Judge Tigar. Civil L.R. 3-12(a).
12
Dated: July 16, 2019 Respectfully submitted,
13
Lee Gelernt* /s/Julie Veroff
14 Omar C. Jadwat* Julie Veroff (SBN 310161)
Anand Balakrishnan* Katrina Eiland (SBN 275701)
15 ACLU FOUNDATION Cody Wofsy (SBN 294179)
IMMIGRANTS’ RIGHTS PROJECT Spencer Amdur (SBN 320069)
16 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor ACLU FOUNDATION
New York, NY 10004 IMMIGRANTS’ RIGHTS PROJECT
17 T: (212) 549-2660 39 Drumm Street
F: (212) 549-2654 San Francisco, CA 94111
18 lgelernt@aclu.org T: (415) 343-0770
ojadwat@aclu.org F: (415) 395-0950
19 abalakrishnan@aclu.org jveroff@aclu.org
keiland@aclu.org
20 Melissa Crow* cwofsy@aclu.org
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER samdur@aclu.org
21 1101 17th Street NW, Suite 705
Washington, DC 20036 Christine P. Sun (SBN 218701)
22 T: (202) 355-4471 Vasudha Talla (SBN 316219)
F: (404) 221-5857 Angélica Salceda**
23 melissa.crow@splcenter.org AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN
24
CALIFORNIA, INC.
25 39 Drumm Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
26 T: (415) 621-2493
F: (415) 255-8437
27 csun@aclunc.org
vtalla@aclunc.org
28 asalceda@aclunc.org
4
Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 115 Filed 07/16/19 Page 7 of 8
1 Mary Bauer*
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER
2 1000 Preston Avenue
Charlottesville, VA 22903
3 T: (470) 606-9307
F: (404) 221-5857
4 mary.bauer@splcenter.org
5
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
6
*Pro hac vice application forthcoming
7 **Application for admission forthcoming
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 115 Filed 07/16/19 Page 8 of 8
1
2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
3 I hereby certify that on July 16, 2019, I caused a PDF version of the foregoing document to
4
be electronically transmitted to the Clerk of the Court, using the CM/ECF system for filing and
5
emailed courtesy copies to all necessary parties.
6
Dated: July 16, 2019 /s/ Julie Veroff
7 Julie Veroff
Attorney for Plaintiffs
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6
Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 115-1 Filed 07/16/19 Page 1 of 3
1 Lee Gelernt* Katrina Eiland (SBN 275701)
Omar C. Jadwat* Cody Wofsy (SBN 294179)
2 Anand Balakrishnan* Spencer Amdur (SBN 320069)
ACLU FOUNDATION Julie Veroff (SBN 310161)
3 IMMIGRANTS’ RIGHTS PROJECT ACLU FOUNDATION
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor IMMIGRANTS’ RIGHTS PROJECT
4 New York, NY 10004 39 Drumm Street
T: (212) 549-2660 San Francisco, CA 94111
5 F: (212) 549-2654 T: (415) 343-0770
lgelernt@aclu.org F: (415) 395-0950
6 ojadwat@aclu.org keiland@aclu.org
abalakrishnan@aclu.org cwofsy@aclu.org
7 samdur@aclu.org
jveroff@aclu.org
8 Attorneys for Plaintiffs
(Additional counsel listed on following page)
9
10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
East Bay Sanctuary Covenant; Al Otro Lado;
12 Innovation Law Lab; and Central American Case No.: 18-cv-06810
Resource Center in Los Angeles,
13
Plaintiffs,
14 DECLARATION OF KATRINA L.
v. EILAND IN SUPPORT OF
15 PLAINTIFFS’ ADMINISTRATIVE
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, in MOTION TO CONSIDER
16 his official capacity; William Barr, Attorney WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE
General, in his official capacity; U.S. Department RELATED
17 of Justice; James McHenry, Director of the
Executive Office for Immigration Review, in his [IMMIGRATION ACTION]
18 official capacity; the Executive Office for
Immigration Review; Kevin McAleenan, Acting
19 Secretary of Homeland Security, in his official
capacity; U.S. Department of Homeland Security;
20 Ken Cuccinelli, Acting Director of the U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services, in his
21 official capacity; U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services; John Sanders,
22 Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, in his official capacity; U.S. Customs
23 and Border Protection; Matthew Albence, Acting
Director of Immigration and Customs
24 Enforcement, in his official capacity; Immigration
and Customs Enforcement,
25
Defendants.
26
27
28
Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 115-1 Filed 07/16/19 Page 2 of 3
1 Melissa Crow* Baher Azmy*
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER Angelo Guisado*
2 1101 17th Street, NW Suite 705 Ghita Schwarz*
Washington, D.C. 20036 CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
3 T: (202) 355-4471 666 Broadway, 7th Floor
F: (404) 221-5857 New York, NY 10012
4 melissa.crow@splcenter.org T: (212) 614-6464
F: (212) 614-6499
5 Mary Bauer* bazmy@ccrjustice.org
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER aguisado@ccrjustice.org
6 1000 Preston Avenue gschwarz@ccrjustice.org
Charlottesville, VA 22903
7 T: (470) 606-9307 Christine P. Sun (SBN 218701)
F: (404) 221-5857 Vasudha Talla (SBN 316219)
8 mary.bauer@splcenter.org Angélica Salceda**
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
9 FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN
10 CALIFORNIA, INC.
39 Drumm Street
11 San Francisco, CA 94111
T: (415) 621-2493
12 F: (415) 255-8437
Attorneys for Plaintiffs csun@aclunc.org
13 vtalla@aclunc.org
*Pro hac vice application forthcoming asalceda@aclunc.org
**Application for admission pending
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 115-1 Filed 07/16/19 Page 3 of 3
1 DECLARATION PURSUANT TO CIVIL L.R. 7-11(a)
2 I, Katrina L. Eiland declare:
3 1. I am an attorney at law licensed to practice in the state of California. I am a Staff Attorney at
4 the American Civil Liberties Union Immigrants’ Rights Project, and counsel for Plaintiffs in East
5 Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Barr, Case No. 3:19-cv-04073 (N.D. Cal.). I make this Declaration from
6 personal knowledge, and if called to testify, I could and would testify competently thereto.
7 2. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-11, an Administrative Motion must be accompanied by either
8 a stipulation or a declaration that explains why a stipulation could not be obtained.
9 3. A stipulation regarding this motion could not be obtained because on July 16, 2019, the
10 counsel for Defendants in East Bay (Erez R. Reuveni) stated via email that Defendants oppose the
11 motion.
12 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on July 16,
13 2019, at San Francisco, California.
14
/s/ Katrina L. Eiland
15
KATRINA L. EILAND
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER
CASES SHOULD BE RELATED, PURSUANT TO CIVIL L.R 3-12 AND CIVIL L.R.7-11
Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 115-2 Filed 07/16/19 Page 1 of 3
1
Lee Gelernt* Katrina Eiland (SBN 275701)
2 Omar C. Jadwat* Cody Wofsy (SBN 294179)
Anand Balakrishnan* Spencer Amdur (SBN 320069)
3 ACLU FOUNDATION Julie Veroff (SBN 310161)
IMMIGRANTS’ RIGHTS PROJECT ACLU FOUNDATION
4 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor IMMIGRANTS’ RIGHTS PROJECT
New York, NY 10004 39 Drumm Street
5 T: (212) 549-2660 San Francisco, CA 94111
F: (212) 549-2654 T: (415) 343-0770
6 lgelernt@aclu.org F: (415) 395-0950
ojadwat@aclu.org keiland@aclu.org
7 abalakrishnan@aclu.org cwofsy@aclu.org
samdur@aclu.org
8 jveroff@aclu.org
9
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
10 (Additional counsel listed on following page)
11
12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13
East Bay Sanctuary Covenant; Al Otro Lado;
14 Innovation Law Lab; and Central American Case No.: 18-cv-06810
Resource Center in Los Angeles,
15
Plaintiffs, [PROPOSED] ORDER TO GRANT
16 PLAINTIFFS’ADMINISTRATIVE
v. MOTION TO CONSIDER
17 WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, in RELATED, PURSUANT TO CIVIL
18 his official capacity; William Barr, Attorney L.R. 3-12 AND CIVIL L.R. 7-11
General, in his official capacity; U.S. Department
19 of Justice; James McHenry, Director of the [IMMIGRATION ACTION]
Executive Office for Immigration Review, in his
20 official capacity; the Executive Office for
Immigration Review; Kevin McAleenan, Acting
21 Secretary of Homeland Security, in his official
capacity; U.S. Department of Homeland Security;
22 Ken Cuccinelli, Acting Director of the U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services, in his
23 official capacity; U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services; John Sanders,
24 Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, in his official capacity; U.S. Customs
25 and Border Protection; Matthew Albence, Acting
Director of Immigration and Customs
26 Enforcement, in his official capacity; Immigration
and Customs Enforcement,
27
Defendants.
28
Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 115-2 Filed 07/16/19 Page 2 of 3
1 Melissa Crow* Baher Azmy*
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER Angelo Guisado*
2 1101 17th Street, NW Suite 705 Ghita Schwarz*
Washington, D.C. 20036 CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
3 T: (202) 355-4471 666 Broadway, 7th Floor
F: (404) 221-5857 New York, NY 10012
4 melissa.crow@splcenter.org T: (212) 614-6464
F: (212) 614-6499
5 Mary Bauer* bazmy@ccrjustice.org
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER aguisado@ccrjustice.org
6 1000 Preston Avenue gschwarz@ccrjustice.org
Charlottesville, VA 22903
7 T: (470) 606-9307 Christine P. Sun (SBN 218701)
F: (404) 221-5857 Vasudha Talla (SBN 316219)
8 mary.bauer@splcenter.org Angélica Salceda**
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
9 FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN
10 CALIFORNIA, INC.
39 Drumm Street
11 San Francisco, CA 94111
T: (415) 621-2493
12 F: (415) 255-8437
Attorneys for Plaintiffs csun@aclunc.org
13 vtalla@aclunc.org
*Pro hac vice application forthcoming asalceda@aclunc.org
**Application for admission pending
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case 3:18-cv-06810-JST Document 115-2 Filed 07/16/19 Page 3 of 3
Having considered the Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases are Related filed
1
2 by Plaintiffs in East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Barr, Case No. 3:19-cv-04073, and the supporting
3 materials filed by Plaintiffs,
4 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the following two actions are deemed related in accordance
5 with Civil Local Rule 3-12:
6
(1) East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Trump, Case No. 3:18-cv-06810-JST
7
(2) East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Barr, Case No. 3:19-cv-04073.
8
9 IT IS SO ORDERED.
10
Dated:___________________ _______________________________________
11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTJUDGE
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.cand.334557.115.0.pdf
- Size
- 116,809 bytes
- SHA-256
- 61742e47c34a07c2bc2c4a960f0ac24212c988c222c3b088f25ec7f0e435c854
- Original
- archive.org