State of Washington et al v. United States of America et al

Filing 33

NOTICE of Supplemental Authority re #22 MOTION to Dismiss by Defendants Alex Azar, Thomas Homan, Scott Lloyd, Kevin K. McAleenan, Kirstjen Nielsen, Office of Refugee Resettlement, Jefferson Beauregard Sessions, III, Donald Trump, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, United States of America (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1)(Press, Joshua)

Download PDF
The Honorable Marsha J. Pechman 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 8 9 10 11 No. 2:18-cv-0939 (MJP) STATE OF WASHINGTON, et al., 12 13 14 15 Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY Noted For Consideration: August 3, 2018 Defendants. Oral Argument Requested 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY State of Washington, et al. v. United States, et al., Case No. 2:18-cv-00939 (MJP) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CIVIL DIVISION, OIL-DCS P.O. BOX 868 BEN FRANKLIN STATION WASHINGTON, DC 20044 TELEPHONE: (202) 305-0106 FACSIMILE: (202) 305-7000 1 Defendants, by and through undersigned counsel, respectfully submit this Notice of 2 Supplemental Authority to bring the Court’s attention to the July 19, 2018 decision by the 3 United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in N.T.C. v. ICE, No. 18-cv- 4 6428, Dkt. 20, slip op. (S.D.N.Y. July 19, 2018) (Exhibit 1). The court in N.T.C. addressed 5 whether a putative class action “brought on behalf of children who were separated from their 6 parents and are now being held in New York State” should be able to “seek to ensure that each 7 class member has a meaningful opportunity to pursue asylum[.]” Id. at 2. Recognizing the 8 substantive overlap with Ms. L. v. ICE, No. 18-cv-428 (S.D. Cal.), Judge Furman “conclude[d] 9 for several reasons that Plaintiffs’ claims should be transferred to the Southern District of 10 California to be considered in conjunction with the claims in Ms. L.” Id. at 3. Notably, Judge 11 Furman’s opinion affirms many of the same arguments made in Defendants’ Motion to Transfer 12 Venue (Dkt. 22): 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 First, the … two cases concern the same families: Plaintiffs in this case seek relief on behalf of children whose parents are class members in Ms. L. (Compare Order, Ms. L., ECF No. 82, at 17, with Compl., ¶ 66). Second, the relief Plaintiffs seek in this case is, at bottom, directly related to the reunification process being supervised by Judge Sabraw. In essence, Plaintiffs here contend that they have rights and interests distinct from the rights and interests of their parents and that the reunification process, and Judge Sabraw’s own orders, do not adequately take their distinct rights and interests into account. That may or may not be the case, but Judge Sabraw is in a better position than this Court to decide those questions and to modify his own orders if appropriate. And third, in the absence of a single judge presiding over both cases, there is a real risk of inconsistent decisions and conflicting orders — a particularly intolerable risk given the gravity and urgency of the issues in these cases (and the prospect of similar litigation being filed in other states where children separated from their parents are being held). Id. at 3–4. 23 This same reasoning applies where the Plaintiff States seek to pursue many of the exact 24 same remedies and develop the same legal theories that are currently being litigated before 25 Judge Sabraw in Ms. L. If anything, the case for transfer is even strong here. In N.T.C., there 26 was at least a distinction between the interests of the children and those of their parents. In this 27 case, the States’ interests are fully derivative of the parents and children, both of whom are now 28 before the Ms. L. court. Recognizing that permitting the putative class action in N.T.C. to DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY State of Washington, et al. v. United States, et al., Case No. 2:18-cv-00939 (MJP) -1- U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CIVIL DIVISION, OIL-DCS P.O. BOX 868 BEN FRANKLIN STATION WASHINGTON, DC 20044 TELEPHONE: (202) 305-0106 FACSIMILE: (202) 305-7000 1 continue in parallel to Ms. L. would lead to duplicative litigation, wastefulness, and potential for 2 conflicting court orders, Judge Furman concluded that “the inconvenience to Plaintiffs … is 3 vastly outweighed by the interests of justice, fairness, efficiency, and avoidance of conflict 4 advanced by having a single judge presiding over both cases,” and ordered the case transferred. 5 Id. at 4 (emphasis added). The inconvenience here is of course even less since one of the 6 Plaintiffs is the State of California. 7 8 There is consequently no reason why the States’ case should be treated differently from N.T.C.’s putative class of children—whose interests the States ostensibly wish to protect. 9 10 Respectfully submitted, DATED: July 19, 2018 CHAD A. READLER Acting Assistant Attorney General 11 WILLIAM C. PEACHEY Director 12 13 EREZ REUVENI Assistant Director 14 15 NICOLE N. MURLEY Trial Attorney 16 17 /s/ Joshua S. Press JOSHUA S. PRESS Trial Attorneys United States Department of Justice Civil Division Office of Immigration Litigation District Court Section P.O. Box 868, Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044 Phone: (202) 305-0106 joshua.press@usdoj.gov 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Attorneys for the United States of America and the Federal Defendants 25 26 27 28 DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY State of Washington, et al. v. United States, et al., Case No. 2:18-cv-00939 (MJP) -2- U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CIVIL DIVISION, OIL-DCS P.O. BOX 868 BEN FRANKLIN STATION WASHINGTON, DC 20044 TELEPHONE: (202) 305-0106 FACSIMILE: (202) 305-7000 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I hereby certify that on July 19, 2018, I electronically transmitted the foregoing 3 document to the Clerk’s Office using the U.S. District Court for the Western District of 4 Washington’s Electronic Document Filing System (ECF), which will serve a copy of this 5 document upon all counsel of record. 6 By: /s/ Joshua S. Press JOSHUA S. PRESS Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice Civil Division 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY State of Washington, et al. v. United States, et al., Case No. 2:18-cv-00939 (MJP) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CIVIL DIVISION, OIL-DCS P.O. BOX 868 BEN FRANKLIN STATION WASHINGTON, DC 20044 TELEPHONE: (202) 305-0106 FACSIMILE: (202) 305-7000

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.


Why Is My Information Online?