Cases 1 - 8 of 8
State of New York et al v. Trump et al
as 1:2020cv05770
Plaintiff:
City of Seattle, State of North Carolina, State of Minnesota and others
Defendant:
United States Department of Commerce, Wilbur L. Ross Jr., Steven Dillingham and others
Consolidated Plaintiff:
Make the Road New York, Casa, FIEL Houston Inc, ADC Research Institute and others
Amicus Curiae:
The League of Women Voters of the United States, 16 Businesses and Business Organizations, The League of Women Voters of California and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551
Make the Road New York et al v. Pompeo et al
as 1:2019cv11633
Defendant:
Alex Azar, Michael Pompeo, Donald Trump and others
Plaintiff:
Catholic Charities Community Services (Archdiocese of New York), Diana Doe, Brenda Doe and others
Amicus Curiae:
State of Hawaii, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, City of Chicago and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551
Make the Road New York et al v. Cuccinelli et al
as 1:2019cv07993
Defendant:
United States Department of Homeland Security, Kevin K. McAleenan, Ken Cuccinelli and others
Plaintiff:
Catholic Charities Community Services (Archdiocese of New York), Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc., Make the Road New York and others
Amicus Curiae:
American Public Health Association, Congressional Tri-Caucus, American Academy of Nursing and others
Interested Party:
National Council on Independent Living, Asian Americans Advancing Justice/Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund/National Women's Law Center, Economic Progress Institute and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551
State of New York et al v. United States Department of Homeland Security et al
as 1:2019cv07777
Defendant:
United States Department of Homeland Security, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Kevin K. McAleenan and others
Plaintiff:
CITY OF NEW YORK, STATE OF NEW YORK, STATE OF VERMONT and others
Interested Party:
National Council on Independent Living, Center for Public Representation, Autistic Self Advocacy Network and others
Amicus Curiae:
Congressional Tri-Caucus, The National Asian Pacific Center on Aging, American Medical Association and others
Alternative Dispute Resolution (Adr) Provider:
Immigration Reform Law Institute
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Batalla Vidal v. Nielsen
as 18-1986
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Martin Jonathan Batall Vidal, Make the Road New York, on behalf of itself, its members, its clients, and all similarly situated individuals, Antonio Alarcon and others
Defendant - Appellant:
Kirstjen M. Nielsen, Secretary of Homeland Security, Jefferson B. Sessions III, United States Attorney General and Donald J. Trump, President of the United States
Batalla Vidal v. Nielsen
as 18-1985
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Martin Jonathan Batall Vidal, Make the Road New York, on behalf of itself, its members, its clients, and all similarly situated individuals, Antonio Alarcon and others
Defendant - Appellant:
Kirstjen M. Nielsen, Secretary of Homeland Security, Jefferson B. Sessions III, United States Attorney General and Donald J. Trump, President of the United States
Vidal v. Nielsen
as 18-1521
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Martin Jonathan Batall Vidal, Make the Road New York, on behalf of itself, its members, its clients, and all similarly situated individuals, Antonio Alarcon and others
Defendant - Appellant:
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, Kirstjen M. Nielsen, Secretary of Homeland Security and Jefferson B. Sessions III
Vidal v. Nielsen
as 18-485
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Martin Jonathan Batall Vidal, Make the Road New York, on behalf of itself, its members, its clients, and all similarly situated individuals, Antonio Alarcon and others
Defendant - Appellant:
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement and others
Amicus Curiae:
Citizens United, Citizens United Foundation, Public Advocate of the United States and others
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
