- Litigation
Challenging the Expansion of Expedited Removal
Make the Road New York v. Wolf, Case 1:19-cv-02369
Expedited removal is a procedure that allows a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) official to summarily deport a noncitizen without a hearing before an immigration judge or meaningful review.
Individuals subjected to expedited removal may be removed within hours of apprehension, without an opportunity to:
- Speak with an attorney.
- Gather evidence or call witnesses.
- Present a claim for relief from removal, other than a truncated process for expressing fear of persecution.
- Seek review of their expedited removal order except under limited circumstances.
For over two decades, federal immigration authorities have authorized the use of expedited removal narrowly: to noncitizens who are seeking admission at a port of entry, who have been apprehended near the border shortly after they entered the country, or who arrive in the United States by sea.
On July 23, 2019, DHS issued a new rule to expand the reach of expedited removal to individuals who have been living in the United States for two years or less, and who live anywhere in the United States.
This case challenges this expansion of expedited removal. Plaintiffs are three organizations with members who are subject to the new rule. Plaintiffs claim that the new rule violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, the Administrative Procedure Act, and federal immigration laws.
The case was filed on August 6, 2019 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by the American Immigration Council, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the law firm of Simpson Thatcher & Bartlett LLP.
On September 27, 2019, the court granted Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, blocking the expansion of expedited removal from taking effect. However, the D.C. Circuit Court of appeals overturned that decision on June 23, 2020. As a result, DHS was permitted to expand its use of expedited removal as of October 2020.
Plaintiffs filed a new motion for a preliminary injunction on October 19, 2020. The parties are awaiting the courts decision on whether to block the expansion of expedited removal while the case moves forward.
