Skip to content

Protected: Form I-213 Redacted

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

AILA’s Request To Reveal Immigration Judges’ Misconduct




Family Detention: Motion to Enforce With Exhibits Part 2


Exhibits 14-18

14. Declaration of Lindsay Harris (Flores Violations) 285

15. Declaration of Lindsay Harris (Medical Conditions) w/ Exhibits 290

16. Declaration of Lindsay Harris (Due Process) 375

17. Declaration of Manoj Govindaiah w/ Exhibit 385

18. Declaration of Robert Doggett w/Exhibis 409

Family Detention: Motion to Enforce With Exhibits Part 1

Motion to Enforce Settlement and Appoint a Special Monitor


Exhibits 1-13:

1. Declaration of Peter Schey 1

2. Excerpts of Exhibits 66

3. Declaration of Bridget Cambria 103

4. Declaration of Carol Anne Donohoe 114

5. Declaration of Jacqueline Kline 119

6. Declaration of Jocelyn Dyer 154

7. Declaration of Natalia Ospina 159

8. Declaration of Leanne Purdum 162

9. Declaration of Theresa Wilkes 166

10. Declaration of Amanda Doroshow 170

11. Declaration of Ed Mccarthy 173

12. Declaration of Robyn Barnard w/ Exhibits 176

13. Declaration of Karen Lucas w/ Exhibits 212


Declaration of AFOD Joshua Reid & Berks County Family Residential Handbook

Declaration of Assistant Field Office Director, Joshua Reid, & Berks County Residential Center Handbook. This document was filed on behalf of the Department of Homeland Security in the ongoing Flores litigation. 

Private Criminal Complaint Filed Today Against John F. Kelly & Thomas Homan For Endangering the Welfare of Children

“Mr. Kelly continues to knowingly detain child #1; child #2; and child # 3 in clear violation of 55 PA Code § 3800.283(7); 237 Pa. Code. 200.1(a); which, taken together,

expressly prohibit placing non-delinquent children, non-dependent, or children under the age of 10 in a secure facility.


In doing so, Mr. Kelly has caused each child severe and potentially fatal harm, including but not limited to causing children to suffer from 309.81 Posttraumatic Stress

Disorder, Delayed Onset, Chronic.; 309.81 Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, Chronic; 309.28 [F43.23] Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood;

Suicidal Ideation; and Suicidal Gestures;


Mr.Kelly has and continues, through his agents in DHS and contracted staff at BCRC, to intentionally and unlawfully deprive children of sleep by flashing bright lights

on their faces at 15 minute intervals from 8:30 pm to 6:30 am, a total of 40 interruptions in sleep per night, 280 interruptions in sleep per week; & 14,560 interruptions

per year.”

Credible Fear Statistics for Immigration Judges

Analysis of data on Immigration Judge Credible Fear Reviews 

EOIR response letter & original data on Immigration Judge Credible Fear Reviews 

Credible Fear Cover letter.

EOIR response letter & original data on Family Detention Immigration Judge Credible Fear Reviews

Family Detention Immigration Judge Credible Fear Review


Travel Ban Decision of Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Full decision of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Decision on Trump’s Muslim travel ban. But first an excerpt:

“The question for this Court, distilled to its essential form, is whether the Constitution, as the Supreme Court declared in Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 2, 120 (1866), remains “a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace.” And if so, whether it protects Plaintiffs’ right to challenge an Executive Order that in text speaks with vague words of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination. Surely the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment yet stands as an untiring sentinel for the protection of one of our most cherished founding principles—that government shall not establish any religious orthodoxy, or favor or disfavor one religion over another. Congress granted the President broad power to deny entry to aliens, but that power is not absolute. It cannot go unchecked when, as here, the President wields it through an executive edict that stands to cause irreparable harm to individuals across this nation. Therefore, for the reasons that follow, we affirm in substantial part the district court’s issuance of a nationwide preliminary injunction as to Section 2(c) of the challenged Executive Order.”


“Shortly after courts enjoined the First Executive Order, President Trump issued EO-2, which the President and members of his team characterized as being substantially similar to EO-1. EO-2 has the same name and basic structure as EO-1, but it does not include a preference for religious-minority refugees and excludes Iraq from its list of Designated Countries. EO-2, § 1(e). It also exempts certain categories of nationals from the Designated Countries and institutes a waiver process for qualifying individuals. EO-2, § 3(b), (c). Senior Policy Advisor Miller described the changes to EO-2 as “mostly minor technical differences,” and said that there would be “the same basic policy outcomes for the country.” J.A. 339. White House Press Secretary Spicer stated that “[t]he principles of the [second] executive order remain the same.” J.A. 379. And President Trump, in a speech at a rally, described EO-2 as “a watered down version of the first order.” Appellees’ Br. 7 (citing Reilly, supra). These statements suggest that like EO-1, EO-2’s purpose is to effectuate the promised Muslim ban, and that its changes from EO-1 reflect an effort to help it survive judicial scrutiny, rather than to avoid targeting Muslims for exclusion from the United States.

These statements, taken together, provide direct, specific evidence of what motivated both EO-1 and EO-2: President Trump’s desire to exclude Muslims from the United States. The statements also reveal President Trump’s intended means of effectuating the ban: by targeting majority-Muslim nations instead of Muslims explicitly. And after courts enjoined EO-1, the statements show how President Trump attempted to preserve its core mission: by issuing EO-2—a “watered down” version with “the same basic policy outcomes.” J.A. 339. These statements are the exact type of “readily discoverable fact[s]” that we use in determining a government action’s primary purpose. McCreary, 545 U.S. at 862. They are explicit statements of purpose and are attributable either to President Trump directly or to his advisors. We need not probe anyone’s heart of hearts to discover the purpose of EO-2, for President Trump and his aides have explained it on numerous occasions and in no uncertain terms.”

BIA Remands of Atlanta, Charlotte, & Dallas Immigration Judges

Board of lmmigration Appeals (BIA) decisions between January 1, 2014, and May 262016 arising from cases heard by the following Immigration Judges : James A. Nugent ; Deitrich H. Sims ; Michael Baird; William A. Cassidy; Madeline Garcia; Dan Pelletier; Earle Wilson ; Stuart VCouch; Theresa Holmes-Simmons; and Barry Pettinato.

BIA Remands of Immigration Judge Earle Wilson 


BIA Remands of Immigration Judge Deitrich Sims 



BIA Remands of Immigration Judge J. Dan Pelletier



BIA Remands of Immigration Judge V. Stuart Couch



BIA Remands of Immigration Judge William Cassidy



BIA Remands of Immigration Judge Michael Baird



BIA Remands of Immigration Judge Barry Pettinato



BIA Remands of Immigration Judge James Nugent


BIA Remands of Immigration Judge Simmons



BIA Remands of Immigration Judge Madeline Garcia


Background Check Remands





Unpublished BIA Remands

All Board of Immigration Appeal Remands in December of 2016



All Board of Immigration Appeal Remands in November of 2016


All Board of Immigration Appeal Remands in October of 2016



All Board of Immigration Appeal Remands in August of 2016



All Board of Immigration Appeal Remands in July of 2016


All Board of Immigration Appeal Remands in June of 2016



All Board of Immigration Appeal Remands in May of 2016



All Board of Immigration Appeal Remands in April of 2016