Cases 11 - 20 of 25
State of Hawaii v. Trump
as 1:2017cv00050
Defendant:
Trump, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Donald J. Trump and others
Plaintiff:
State of Hawaii, Ismail Elshikh, Muslim Association of Hawaii, Inc. and others
Amicus Curiae:
Rabbi Joel Mosbacher, State of Oregon, American Center for Law and Justice and others
Intervenor:
Frederick Banks, Ph.D. Vincent Lucas, Joseph Camp and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Violation 5th & 8th Amendment
TRUSTEES OF PRINCETON UNIVERSITY et al v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2017cv02325
Plaintiff:
MICROSOFT CORPORATION, THE TRUSTEES OF PRINCETON UNIVERSITY, MARIA DE LA CRUZ PERALES SANCHEZ and others
Defendant:
DUKE C. ELAINE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and others
Amicus Curiae:
CAPITAL COMMUNITY COLLEGE, HAMPSHIRE COLLEGE, MASSACHUSETTS LAW REFORM INSTITUTE (MLRI) and others
Petitioner:
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER, BAR ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO, CUNY DREAMERS and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702
Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Asian Law Caucus v. United States Department of Homeland Security et al
as 3:2017cv04388
Plaintiff:
Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Asian Law Caucus
Defendant:
United States Department of Homeland Security and United States Immigration & Customs Enforcement
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
National Day Laborer Organizin v. United States Immigration and
as 17-1927
Plaintiff - Appellant:
National Day Laborer Organizing Network, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Immigration Justice Clinic and Asian Americans Advancing Justice, Asian Law Caucus
Defendant - Appellee:
United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, United States Department of Justice, United States Department of Homeland Security and others
National Day Laborer Organizing Network et al v. United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement et al
as 1:2016cv00387
Plaintiff:
National Day Laborer Organizing Network , Immigration Justice Clinic of The Benjamin N. Cardozo School Of Law and Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Asian Law Caucus
Defendant:
United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement , United States Department of Justice , United States Department of Homeland Security and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
Abigail Fisher, et al v. State of Texas, et al
as 09-50822
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ABIGAIL NOEL FISHER and RACHEL MULTER MICHALEWICZ
Defendant - Appellee:
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN, DAVID B. PRYOR, Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs in His Official Capacity, WILLIAM POWERS, JR., President of the University of Texas at Austin in His Official Capacity and others
Amicus Curiae:
THE ASIAN AMERICAN LEGAL FOUNDATION, MOUNTAIN STATES LEGAL FOUNDATION, PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION and others
The American Civil Liberties Union of North California et al v. Federal Bureau of Investigation
as 3:2010cv03759
Plaintiff:
The American Civil Liberties Union of North California , Asian Law Caucus and San Francisco Bay Guardian
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552 Right to Privacy Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2010cv10717
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Amicu:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 1105
Damion Wilks v. Department of Homeland Securit, et al
as 08-3352
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAMION A.D. WILKS
Defendant - Appellee:
BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION & CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY and THOMAS DURAN
Not Party - Amicus Appellant:
ASIAN LAW CAUCUS, COMM JUSTICE PROJECT, CORNELL ASYLUM CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE APPELLATE LAW CLINIC and others
Asian Law Caucus et al v. United States Department of Homeland Security
as 4:2008cv00842
Plaintiff:
Asian Law Caucus, Asian Law Caucus, Electronic Frontier Foundation and others
Defendant:
United States Department of Homeland Security
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552 Freedom of Information Act
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.
