New Orleans, LA – Innovation Law Lab, a non-profit organization that seeks to advance refugee and immigrant justice, has filed a motion to stay the nationwide scope of the injunction issued in Arizona v. CDC, a case brought in the Western District of Louisiana by Arizona, Texas, and 22 non-border states seeking to stop the Biden administration’s termination of the Title 42 order.
“The dangerous and unlawful nationwide injunction in Arizona v. CDC must be stayed immediately—as a matter of life and death,” said Tess Hellgren, Deputy Legal Director for Innovation Law Lab. “Just last week, a funeral was held for two Haitians—Jocelyn Anselme and Calory Archange—whose lives were unjustly taken from them in Tijuana while they waited for the U.S. to allow them to apply for asylum. If it weren’t for Title 42, our organization could have been providing legal representation for Jocelyn and Calory, instead of mourning their deaths. Title 42 is literally killing people by not allowing them to seek asylum in the United States.”
The nationwide injunction issued by Judge Robert R. Summerhays of the federal court in the Western District of Louisiana effectively grants Arizona and Texas’ demands to continue the implementation of Title 42 along the entire southern border, even in California and New Mexico, two states that are not parties to the lawsuit. In their motion to stay Judge Summerhays’ nationwide injunction, Immigration Law Lab explains:
It is undisputed that the district court’s order imposes significant burdens on people who will never harm the Plaintiff States, because it bars access to the asylum system for people who have no intention of ever leaving California or New Mexico. And the injunction greatly harms Law Lab’s interests in assisting such individuals, even though they will never burden any Plaintiff State.
Represented by the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at the UCLA School of Law (CILP) and the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild, Innovation Law Lab has sought to intervene in Arizona v. CDC and filed an amicus brief for the sole purpose of arguing that even if the court agreed with Arizona and Texas, and ruled that the Title 42 order should remain in place, that that order should be limited to the suing states, and not slam the door shut on people who seek refuge in California and New Mexico.
“The nationwide injunction the court ordered has effectively allowed states like Arizona and Texas to force the continued implementation of the dangerous Title 42 order along the entire Southern border, at the expense of states, organizations, and people that are not parties to this lawsuit,” said Monika Y. Langarica, staff attorney for the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA Law. “Title 42 causes unspeakable harm to people who seek nothing more than protection for themselves and their families. In contrast, the states that brought this case have failed to prove that people who seek asylum in places like California and New Mexico will cause them harm that justifies such a sweeping order. At the very least, the Fifth Circuit should limit the injunction to the states that brought this lawsuit while it considers our appeal.”
The CDC issued an order terminating Title 42, which was set to take effect on May 23, 2022. But because of the nationwide injunction Judge Summerhays ordered on May 20, refugees at the border continue to be indefinitely blocked from seeking asylum by Title 42. In Mexican border cities, they often face homelessness, and are at great risk of becoming victims of crime, including kidnapping and murder. Innovation Law Lab and other organizations stand ready to help people and families seeking asylum on our Southern border but are unable to do so because of Title 42.
“For more than two years, Title 42 has cruelly and arbitrarily prevented people from exercising their right to seek asylum in the United States,” said Matt Vogel, Supervising Attorney at the National Immigration Project (NIPNLG). “Given the extent of the harm the nationwide scope of the injunction is causing in places that are not even party to this litigation, the scope of the injunction should at the very least be limited only to the states involved in the litigation and should be stopped from applying nationwide.”
Read: Innovation Law Lab’s Motion to Stay the Nationwide Scope of Injunction in Arizona v. CDC.
BACKGROUND SOURCES FOR INTERVENTION TIMELINE
May 9, 2022: Innovation Law Lab and a family seeking asylum file Motion for Limited Intervention arguing that any court order keeping the Title 42 expulsion order in place should not apply to those seeking asylum in California and New Mexico.
May 13, 2022: At a hearing on the motion for a preliminary injunction, Judge Summerhays (WD-LA) denies Motion for Limited Intervention but allows argument on scope of injunction as amicus.
May 18, 2022: Innovation Law Lab and a family seeking asylum file Amicus Brief arguing that any court order keeping the Title 42 expulsion order in place should not apply to those seeking asylum in California and New Mexico.
May 20, 2022: Judge Summerhays (WD-LA) grants Plaintiff States’ motion for a nationwide injunction, ordering the continued implementation of Title 42 across the entire border.
May 23, 2022: Previously announced termination of Title 42 blocked by nationwide injunction.
May 26, 2022: Innovation Law Lab files Motion to Stay Nationwide Scope of Preliminary Injunction in district court in the Western District of Louisiana.
May 27, 2022: Judge Summerhays (WD-LA) denies Innovation Law Lab’s Motion to Stay Nationwide Scope of Preliminary Injunction.
June 2, 2022: Innovation Law Lab files Motion to Stay Nationwide Scope of Preliminary Injunction at Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Founded in 2020, the Center for Immigration Law and Policy (CILP) at the UCLA School of Law expands the law school's role as a national leader in immigration law and policy, generating innovative ideas at the intersection of immigration scholarship and practice and serving as a hub for transforming those ideas into meaningful changes in immigration policy.