Subsequent Trump and Court Action(s)

• May 13, 2020

  Under Trump border rules, U.S. has granted refuge to just two people since late March during coronavirus outbreak, records show

  Unpublished U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services data obtained by The Washington Post show that "[c]iting the threat to public health from the coronavirus, the Trump administration has suspended most due-process rights for migrants, including children and asylum seekers, while 'expelling' more than 20,000 unauthorized border-crossers to Mexico under a provision of U.S. code known as Title 42."

  View Document
• May 19, 2020

  Amendment and Extension of Order Suspending Introduction Of Certain Persons From Countries Where A Communicable Disease Exists

  On May 19, 2020, CDC indefinitely extended the order, pending review every 30 days. "Upon determining that the further introduction of COVID-19 into the United States is no longer a serious danger to the public health necessitating the continuation of this Order, [the CDC Director] will publish a notice in the Federal Register terminating this Order and its Extensions."

  View Document
• June 24, 2020

  ACLU - Federal Court Again Blocks Removal of Honduran Youth in First Challenge to Trump Administration's Illegal Border Expulsion Order

  In June 2020, ACLU and CGRS filed suit in J.B.B.C. v. Wolf, winning a TRO blocking expulsion of a child under title 42. The case was subsequently voluntarily dismissed on August 6, 2020. See J.B.B.C. v. Wolf (D.D.C. 1:20-cv-01509).

  **Litigation is listed for informational purposes and is not comprehensive. For the current status of legal challenges, check other sources.**

  View Document
• September 11, 2020

  Control of Communicable Diseases; Foreign Quarantine: Suspension of the Right To Introduce and Prohibition of Introduction of Persons Into United States From Designated Foreign Countries or Places for Public Health Purposes

  COVID 19: Centers for Disease Control issued a final rule extending the CDC Director's temporary power into a permanent one by creating a procedure through which CDC can prohibit the introduction of people into the U.S. with the stated aim of protecting public health. There are various exceptions, including U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents (LPRs).

  This policy came into effect on October 13, 2020.

  View Document
• October 16, 2020

  Order Suspending the Right To Introduce Certain Persons From Countries Where a Quarantinable Communicable Disease Exists

  On October 16, 2020, the CDC issued notice of a new order replacing the Order Suspending Introduction of Certain Persons from Countries Where a Communicable Disease Exists issued on March 20, 2020, extended on April 20, 2020, and amended May 19, 2020. While the October order is substantially similar to original March order, it defines COVID-19 as a "quarantinable communicable disease," a designation not made in prior orders. The new order went into effect on October 13, 2020.

  View Document
• October 28, 2020

  Border Officials Turned Away Unaccompanied Immigrant Children More Than 13,000 Times

  On October 28, 2020, Buzzfeed News reported that DHS has expelled unaccompanied immigrant children from the U.S. border more than 13,000 times since March, according to an internal document the reporter obtained.

  View Document
• December 13, 2020

  2020.12.23 U.S. border officials expelled dozens of migrant children in violation of court order

  CBP continues to expel unaccompanied minors in contravention of the Nov. 18, 2020 P.J.E.S. court order enjoining such action.

  View Document
• January 29, 2021

  Complaint - P.J.E.S. v. Wolf

  In August 2020, the ACLU, Texas Civil Rights Project, and Oxfam filed a class action suit, P.J.E.S. v. Wolf (D.D.C. 1:20-cv-02245), challenging the expulsion of unaccompanied minors under Title 42 COVID restrictions. A magistrate judge on Sept. 25, 2020 recommended the grant of a preliminary injunction and class certification. On November 18, 2020, the federal district court in D.C. granted the preliminary injunction and on January 29, 2021, the D.C. Circuit granted a stay of the preliminary injunction pending appeal.

  On March 11, 2022, the CDC terminated the expulsion policy to the extent it applied to unaccompanied children. In fall 2022, the government then argued that the controversy at stake had become moot because the expulsion policy no longer extended to unaccompanied minors. They asked the court of appeals to vacate the preliminary injunction. The court of appeals remanded the case to the district court “to consider whether all or part of the case has become moot.”

  On January 25, 2023, the district court granted plaintiff's motion to hold the defendant's motion to dismiss in abeyance. The case was stayed pending the completion of appellate proceedings in Huisha-Huisha v. Mayorkas. On November 6, 2023, the parties filed a joint stipulation of dismissal without prejudice.

  **Litigation is listed for informational purposes and is not comprehensive. For the current status of legal challenges, check other sources.**

  View Document
• April 22, 2021

  State of Texas v. Biden et al. (Complaint)

  On April 22, 2021, Texas sued the federal government, alleging that the Biden Administration had failed to abide by its legal requirement to expel incoming non-citizens under Title 42. In Texas' view, the federal government has an affirmative obligation under the INA & APA, as well under the public health laws, to systematically expel all arriving non-citizens, and the Biden administration has shirked its obligations by being excessively lenient in its implementation of this policy.

  The case is State of Texas v. Biden et al., 4:21-cv-00579 (N.D. Tex. April 22, 2021).

  **Litigation is listed for informational purposes and is not comprehensive. For the current status of legal challenges, check other sources.**

  View Document
• September 16, 2021

  2021.09.16 Huisha-Huisha v. Mayorkas, No. 21-100(EGS) (D.D.C., September 16, 2021).

  On September 16, 2021, Judge Emmet Sullivan issued a preliminary injunction to prevent U.S. border officials from using Title 42 to expel families with young children seeking asylum.

  On September 30, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit granted DHS’s request to stay the district court order that blocked the administration from removing migrant families under Title 42 and scheduled argument for January 2022.

  **Litigation is listed for informational purposes and is not comprehensive. For the current status of legal challenges, check other sources.**

  View Document
• December 20, 2021

  2021.12.20 Hatian Bridge Alliance v. Biden, No. 1:21-cv-03317 (D.D.C., Dec. 20, 2021).

  On December 20, 2021, Haitian Bridge Alliance, 11 Haitian asylum seekers, Justice Action Center, and Innovation Law Lab brought a federal suit against the Biden administration for Title 42-related actions that they claim resulted in "physical abuse, racial discrimination, denial of basic necessities and medical treatment, and a complete failure to process asylum claims." The class action alleges the U.S. government violated Haitian asylum seekers’ statutory and constitutional rights when they were held in an encampment in Del Rio, Texas, in mid-September 2021.

  **Litigation is listed for informational purposes and is not comprehensive. For the current status of legal challenges, check other sources.**

  View Document
• March 4, 2022

  2022.03.04 Huisha Huisha v. Mayorkas 21-5200 (CADC March 4, 2022)

  On March 4, 2022, the DC Circuit issued a decision in Huisha-Huisha v. Mayorkas, upholding in part the district court's September 2021 preliminary injunction. The DC Circuit held that though "[i]t is likely that [Title 42] grants the Executive sweeping authority to prohibit aliens from entering the United States during a public-health emergency[, and] that the Executive may expel aliens who violate such a prohibition," the government may not expel noncitizens "to countries where their 'life or freedom would be threatened' on account of their 'race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion' or where they will likely face torture." The court remanded for implementation of these withholding and Convention Against Torture standards, and assessment of the plaintiff's Administrative Procedure Act arbitrary and capricious claim.

  **Litigation is listed for informational purposes and is not comprehensive. For the current status of legal challenges, check other sources.**

  View Document
• November 15, 2022

  Sullivan Order Blocking Title 42

  U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan blocked the use of Title 42, voiding “all orders and decision memos issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services suspending the right to introduce certain persons into the United States.”

  View Document
• December 16, 2022

  Appeals court rules that Title 42 border policy must end Wednesday _ The Texas Tribune

  U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit refuses to stay Judge Sullivan's order from November 2022, on the basis that Republican states have no right to intervene.

  View Document
• December 27, 2022

  Arizona v. Mayorkas

  Supreme Court decision granting a stay and agreeing to hear the intervention issue.

  View Document
• May 18, 2023

  2022.05.18 Supreme Court Order to Remand and Moot

  On May 18, 2023 the Supreme Court remanded Arizona v. Mayorkas to the D.C. Circuit with instructions to moot petitioners' motion to intervene.

  **Litigation is listed for informational purposes and is not comprehensive. For the current status of legal challenges, check other sources.**

  View Document
• May 18, 2023

  2023.05.18 Arizona v. Mayorkas, 598 U.S. ____ (2023)

  In April 2022, the CDC issued an order terminating the Title 42 policy, but a group of States sued to block termination of the Title 42 policy, claiming that the CDC had not solicited public comments before terminating the policy. The ACLU and its co-counsel responded by challenging the policy as a violation of the APA. On November 15, 2022, the D.C. District Court held the policy unlawful because it was arbitrary and capricious, and rejected subsequent State intervention, as did the Court of Appeals.

  The States then sought relief from the Supreme Court. In December 2022, the Court temporarily blocked the district's court's order and granted review regarding the States' right to intervene in the case. After the Biden administration clarified that the expiring public health emergency had been the basis for the Title 42 policy, however, the Court took the case off the argument calendar.

  Title 42 expired on May 11, 2023. On May 18, 2023, the Supreme Court remanded the case to the D.C. Circuit Court with instructions to dismiss the States' motion to intervene as moot.

  **Litigation is listed for informational purposes and is not comprehensive. For the current status of legal challenges, check other sources.**

  View Document
• September 7, 2023

  2023.09.07 Huisha-Huisha v. Mayorkas, No. 22-5325, Order Granting Motion to Vacate and Remand

  On September 7, 2023, following the expiration of Title 42 on May 11, 2023, the D.C. Circuit in Huisha-Huisha v. Mayorkas granted a motion to vacate the district court's judgment and remand with instructions to dismiss the case as moot.

  This effectively terminated the Huisha-Huisha v. Mayorkas litigation.

  **Litigation is listed for informational purposes and is not comprehensive. For the current status of legal challenges, check other sources.**

  View Document