ACLU FOIA Litigation Reveals Details on ICE’s Solitary Confinement Policy Directive

BOSTON — Members of Rümeysa Öztürk’s legal team argued today before the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts in Boston that Ms. Öztürk’s challenge to her unlawful detention and attempted deportation by ICE should remain in Massachusetts, rather than Louisiana, where the Trump administration took Ms. Öztürk after she was arrested and where she is currently detained. “I am a Ph.D. student working with children and youth,” said Rümeysa Öztürk in a statement dictated to her attorney. “We know that injustice in the world and systemic brutality towards people of color has long-lasting negative effects on children, youth, and other communities. My life is committed to choosing peaceful and inclusive ways to meet the needs of children. I believe the world is a more beautiful and peaceful place when we listen to each other and allow different perspectives to be in the room. Writing is one of the most peaceful ways of addressing systemic inequality. Efforts to target me because of my op-ed in the Tufts Daily calling for the equal dignity and humanity of all people will not deter me from my commitment to advocate for the rights of youth and children.” Rümeysa Öztürk, a Ph.D. student at Tufts University, was grabbed, arrested, and detained in Somerville, Massachusetts by plainclothes ICE agents last week in apparent retaliation for a Tufts Daily op-ed she co-authored last year. Last Tuesday, a Massachusetts court ordered the government to not remove Ms. Öztürk from Massachusetts without prior notice. However, sometime after that order, ICE officials transferred Ms. Öztürk to Louisiana without notifying the court, her counsel, or Department of Justice counsel. “The government quietly and quickly hopscotched Ms. Öztürk across multiple states in a concerted effort to evade accountability. She never should have been grabbed from her street in Somerville and secretly moved over 1,300 miles away from her community,” said Carol Rose, executive director of the ACLU of Massachusetts. “We are asking the court to affirm that Ms. Öztürk’s case belongs in Massachusetts — near her friends, community, and legal counsel.” For nearly 24 hours, Ms. Öztürk’s friends, family, and counsel could not locate or contact her. When her attorney was finally able to speak with her, they learned that she had suffered an asthma attack while en route to Louisiana. “Snatching a student off the street in retaliation for an op-ed is a disturbing escalation of the administration’s callous disregard for our civil liberties,” said Noor Zafar, senior staff attorney at the ACLU. “Ms. Öztürk’s case should stay in Massachusetts, where she was cruelly ripped away from her community. We will not stop fighting until this injustice is righted, and until this kind of abusive tactic is unimaginable in America once again.” Ms. Öztürk is a former Fulbright scholar who came to the United States on a student visa and has not been charged with or accused of any crime. Over 20 friends, colleagues, and professors, including the president of Tufts University, have sent letters of support to the court detailing Ms. Öztürk’s dedication to her work and her community and asking for her release. “If the government is afraid of a Ph.D. student writing an op-ed denouncing genocide, then we should be seriously concerned about the integrity of our government,” said Mahsa Khanbabai of Khanbabai Immigration Law. “Rumeysa Ozturk did what we teach all people in America to do in the face of injustice — she spoke up. We will continue fighting until Rumeysa is back in Massachusetts where she belongs, and her rights and freedom are restored.” “From the moment a swarm of ICE agents abducted Ms. Öztürk in broad daylight, the government has spared no effort to evade accountability and deny her due process,” said Mudassar Toppa, a staff attorney at CLEAR, a legal nonprofit and clinic at CUNY School of Law. “We will likewise spare no effort to ensure the government's egregious unlawful conduct does not go unchecked, and that Ms. Öztürk and others like her can continue to express their sincerely held beliefs about Palestinian human rights without fear of retaliation.” “The federal government disappeared Rümeysa in front of horrified onlookers and spirited her away to a detention center in Louisiana, over a thousand miles away,” said Sonya Levitova, an associate at Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP. “No matter what the government says its rationale is for pursuing Rümeysa’s deportation, the reality is this: the government is concocting violations of immigration law to chill and retaliate against speech it doesn’t like. That’s illegal and antithetical to a free society.” Ms. Öztürk is represented by Mahsa Khanbabai, the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Massachusetts, CLEAR, and Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP. More information about this case can be viewed here: https://www.aclum.org/en/cases/ozturk-v-trump

The lawsuit exposes SB 4C as a sweeping and unlawful expansion of state power under the guise of immigration enforcement MIAMI — The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Florida, ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project, and Americans for Immigrant Justice filed a federal lawsuit today challenging Florida’s new extreme anti-immigrant law, Senate Bill 4C (SB 4C), which authorizes state and local law enforcement to imprison people based on their manner of entering the country — powers the Constitution reserves exclusively to the federal government. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, is brought on behalf of the Farmworker Association of Florida, the Florida Immigrant Coalition, and individual plaintiffs — including longtime Florida residents with pending federal immigration applications and with U.S. citizen family members who rely on their care. “Florida’s SB 4C is not just unconstitutional — it’s cruel and dangerous,” said Bacardi Jackson, executive director of the ACLU of Florida. “This law strips power from the federal government and hands it to state officers with no immigration training or authority, threatening to tear families apart and detain people who have every legal right to be here. Our communities deserve safety, dignity, and due process — not politically motivated attacks.” Signed into law by Gov. Ron DeSantis on February 13, SB 4C immediately criminalized a new set of immigration-related offenses under state law, punishing individuals who are 18 or older with mandatory incarceration for “illegal entry” or “illegal reentry” into the state of Florida — even if they are pursuing federal immigration relief which allows them to lawfully remain in the country. “Florida has already started to arrest and prosecute family members, friends, neighbors, and community members,” said Hannah Steinberg, staff attorney with the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project. “We are asking the court to immediately stop Florida from enforcing this unconstitutional law to prevent further devastation to communities across the state.” The law follows statutes from other states that federal courts have unanimously blocked, and it directly conflicts with the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause and Commerce Clause. The lawsuit asks the court to immediately halt enforcement of the unconstitutional law. “Our plaintiffs include a mother applying for a U visa as a victim of crime, a mother of four caring for a child with disabilities, and farmworkers who regularly travel between Florida and other states to harvest our food,” said Amy Godshall, legal fellow and immigrants' rights attorney at the ACLU of Florida. “This law not only violates the Constitution — it threatens the safety and well-being of people who have lived in our communities for decades.” The complaint details how SB 4C forces state law enforcement to make complex federal immigration determinations, authorizes the detention of people who pose no threat, and criminalizes individuals whom the federal government may later grant asylum, visas, or permanent status. The law makes no exceptions for people seeking humanitarian protection or people with pending applications for immigration relief. “Florida's recently passed SB 4C, is an attempt to bypass federal immigration oversight and empower state law enforcement officials to enforce immigration policies,” said Paul R. Chavez, litigation and advocacy director of Americans for Immigrant Justice. “This law could lead to the detention of individuals who pose no threat to our communities,and the denial of basic civil rights protections to immigrants. SB 4C is unconstitutional and may instill fear in the state, potentially driving many immigrants and their families into hiding. We proudly stand in solidarity with our immigrant community to advance and protect all our civil rights.” "Florida’s new SB 4C law is an unconstitutional and devastating attack on Floridians who are immigrants, criminalizing individuals based on just existing in our state,” said Tessa Petit, executive director of the Florida Immigrant Coalition. “For well over a century, courts have made clear that immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility, yet Florida is attempting to overstep its bounds, just as similar laws in Texas, Iowa, and Oklahoma tried. As a leading advocate for Florida’s immigrant community, FLIC is standing against this unconstitutional and unjust law." “Instead of addressing important issues such as affordable housing, inflation and public transportation, this law tears apart families,” said Rene Gomez, the Civic Engagement Coordinator of the Farmworkers Association of Florida (“FWAF”). “Our farmworking and immigrant community are the backbone of this state, contributing to billions in revenue through their labor and taxes. Every resident of our state, whether they are citizens or not, benefits from the contributions of our members and will also be negatively impacted by the economic toll this law will have.” The complaint is here.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project, and Americans for Immigrant Justice filed a federal lawsuit challenging Florida’s new extreme anti-immigrant law, Senate Bill 4C (SB 4C), which authorizes state and local law enforcement to imprison people based on their manner of entering the country — powers the Constitution reserves exclusively to the federal government. The lawsuit is brought on behalf of the Farmworker Association of Florida (FWAF), the Florida Immigrant Coalition (FLIC), and individual plaintiffs — including longtime Florida residents with pending federal immigration applications and with U.S. citizen family members who rely on their care.

UPDATE: Mere hours after sending this press release out, the judge in our case granted our request fir a temporary restraining order preventing the law from being enforced until a decision is made on a preliminary injunction. BOISE — The ACLU of Idaho and the ACLU filed a lawsuit today against the state of Idaho to stop enforcement of House Bill 83, which was signed into law earlier in the day. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit are the Idaho Organization of Resource Councils, the Alliance of Idaho, and five anonymous noncitizens. The lawsuit asks the court to enjoin enforcement of the law. It requests an emergency temporary restraining order preventing enforcement against anyone. The lawsuit argues that H.B. 83 violates the U.S. Constitution by attempting to supersede the federal government’s oversight of immigration enforcement, by impermissibly limiting interstate commerce, and by failing to give ordinary people fair notice of what conduct it proscribes. “The state of Idaho cannot enforce this unconstitutional law,” said Paul Carlos Southwick, ACLU of Idaho legal director. “Every other court to have considered similar laws, including conservative federal appellate courts, have stopped laws like this one from going into effect.” “Idaho’s effort to circumvent the federal immigration system is unconstitutional and will have devastating consequences for families and communities,” said Hannah Steinberg, staff attorney with the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project. “Friends, family members, neighbors, and community members will be pushed into harm’s way regardless of their immigration status. Even people with pending applications for immigration relief can be prosecuted.” “We are disappointed that Idaho’s elected officials seem comfortable with disparaging immigrants, even while recognizing that immigrants are the backbone of several labor industries in our state,” said Ruby Mendez-Mota, ACLU of Idaho campaign strategist. “Not only that, but this is clearly racially motivated, as lawmakers pointed out during debates about this bill. This is absolutely a slap in the face for the Latino community, and we will not tolerate it.” “It is unfortunate that elected officials did not heed our warnings about this unconstitutional bill,” said Leo Morales, ACLU of Idaho executive director. “The ACLU will not stand by as elected officials disregard our constitution. We will see you in court.”