澳彩开奖

Background Information

For decades, the federal government has sought to use local law enforcement agencies to enhance its immigration enforcement efforts. All too often, these agencies have been happy to oblige 鈥� to the detriment of public safety and community building.

Across the South, local and state legislators have handed over our tax dollars to support the federal immigration dragnet, and many city police and county sheriff departments have willingly agreed to spend our tax dollars on federal immigration enforcement. What鈥檚 more, the Trump administration has punished 鈥渟anctuary鈥� or 鈥渨elcoming鈥� cities and counties 鈥� those that have chosen not to entangle themselves in federal immigration law enforcement 鈥� by illegally cutting off federal funding.

The 澳彩开奖 is committed to reducing the entanglement of federal immigration enforcement and local law enforcement agencies across the Deep South.聽To continue reading, click here.

Our Cases

Brooks v. Woods, et. al.
City of South Miami, et al. v. Ron聽DeSantis, et al.聽
Peter Sean Brown v. Richard A. 鈥淩ick鈥� Ramsay聽
Marcos Martinez, et al. v. Hancock County, Mississippi, et al.聽
Low Country Immigration Coalition v. Haley
HICA v. Bentley
GLAHR v. Deal
Angel Francisco Castro-Torres v. Jeremiah M.聽Lignitz聽and Brian J.聽Walraven
Juana Montano-P茅rez, et al. v. Durrett Cheese Sales, Inc.

Amicus briefs in sanctuary cases

The 澳彩开奖 has filed the following 鈥渇riend-of-the-court鈥� briefs, also known as amicus briefs, to defend sanctuary policies in the cases below.

City and County of San Francisco v. Donald J. Trump, et al.
District court brief
Appellate court brief

City of Chicago v. Jefferson B. Sessions III
Appellate court brief

County of Santa Clara v. Donald J. Trump, et al.
District court brief
Appellate court brief

Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images