All Cases

36 Court Cases
Court Case
Sep 24, 2025
Placeholder image
  • Immigrants' Rights

Guerrero Orellana v. Moniz

In September 2025, the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, together with the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, the ACLU of New Hampshire, the ACLU of Maine, the law firm Araujo and Fisher, the law firm Foley Hoag, and the Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinic, filed a class action lawsuit in federal court to challenge the widespread denial of bond hearings to people detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. As the complaint demonstrates, this denial upends decades of settled law and established practice in immigration proceedings. The complaint alleges that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice recently and abruptly began to misclassify people arrested by ICE inside the United States. DHS and DOJ started systematically reclassifying these people from the statutory authority of 8 U.S.C. § 1226, which usually allows for the opportunity to request bond during removal proceedings, to the no-bond detention provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1225, which does not apply to people arrested in the interior of the United States and placed in removal proceedings. This case is brought on behalf of Jose Arnulfo Guerrero Orellana and a putative class of similarly situated individuals. Mr. Guerrero Orellana has been living in the United States for over a decade. He brings this case to vindicate his own right to a bond hearing — where an immigration judge can determine whether his detention is justified to protect the community or ensure his appearance in court — and that of thousands of other detainees in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Maine, and New Hampshire who will be denied the opportunity to seek release on bond under the new legal ruling adopted by the executive branch. The complaint alleges that the government's new policy violates constitutional and statutory due process rights as well as the Administrative Procedure Act. On October 3, 2025, the Court issued a preliminary injunction for the individual plaintiff. The Court ordered that "the government release" the plaintiff "unless he is provided a bond hearing that complies with the standards outlined in Hernandez-Lara v. Lyons, 10 F.4th 19 (1st Cir. 2021), within seven business days of the date of this order."
Court Case
Jun 27, 2025
Placeholder image
  • Immigrants' Rights

Barbara v. Donald J. Trump

On June 27, 2025, immigrants rights’ advocates filed a new nationwide class-action lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship. The lawsuit was in response to the June 27, 2025 Supreme Court ruling that potentially opened the door for partial enforcement of the executive order. This case was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of New Hampshire, ACLU of Maine, ACLU of Massachusetts, Legal Defense Fund, Asian Law Caucus, and Democracy Defenders Fund on behalf of a proposed class of babies subject to the executive order, and their parents. The same group of organizations filed a similar suit in January 2025 in the same court, on behalf of groups with members whose babies born on U.S. soil will be denied citizenship under the order, including New Hampshire Indonesian Community Support, League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), and Make the Road New York. The court issued a ruling protecting members of those organizations. Three other lawsuits originally obtained nationwide injunctions protecting everyone subject to the order, but the Supreme Court’s June 27 decision narrowed those injunctions, potentially leaving some children without protection. This new case seeks protection for all families in the country, filling the gaps that may be left by the existing litigation. Birthright citizenship is the principle that every baby born in the United States is a U.S. citizen. The Constitution’s 14th Amendment guarantees the citizenship of all children born in the United States (with the extremely narrow exception of children of foreign diplomats) regardless of race, color, or ancestry. Specifically, it states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” This lawsuit charges the Trump administration with flouting the Constitution, congressional intent, and longstanding Supreme Court precedent, and it is national in scope. On July 10, 2025, the Court preliminarily blocked President Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship and provisionally certified a nationwide class that protects the citizenship rights of all children born on U.S. soil.
Court Case
Apr 20, 2025
Placeholder image
  • Immigrants' Rights

Pasula v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, et al.

Court Case
Apr 09, 2025
Placeholder image
  • Immigrants' Rights

Liu v. Secretary of Department of Homeland Security

Court Case
Jan 20, 2025
Placeholder image
  • Immigrants' Rights

New Hampshire Indonesian Community Support, et al. v. Donald J. Trump, et al.

Court Case
May 22, 2023
Placeholder image
  • Immigrants' Rights

ACLU of New Hampshire v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Court Case
Feb 09, 2023
Placeholder image
  • Immigrants' Rights

Fernandez Bonilla v. Garland

Court Case
Nov 08, 2022
Placeholder image
  • Immigrants' Rights

Bazile v. Garland/Fonjia v. Garland

Court Case
Sep 01, 2022
Placeholder image
  • Immigrants' Rights

Hernandez Parada v. Garland