Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

States v. Trump

United States District Court, D. Oregon, Eugene Division

August 29, 2019

THE STATE OF OREGON, KATE BROWN, Governor; ELLEN ROSENBLUM, Attorney General; and THE CITY OF PORTLAND, Plaintiffs,
v.
DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United State, in his official capacity; WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General of the United States, in his official capacity; and the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants.

          JUDGMENT AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS; GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN PART, AND ISSUING INJUNCTIONS AND MANDAMUS

          Michael McShane, United States District Judge

         This case comes before the Court on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 14), and Plaintiffs' Combined Motion for Summary Judgment and Response to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 21) (collectively the “Motions”). After considering the Motions together with the supplemental briefs, pleadings, declarations, and exhibits (ECF Nos. 3, 15, 22-25, 29-30), and after hearing the parties arguments at oral argument, the Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:

         FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

         1. In the First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 3), Plaintiffs challenge five requirements for fiscal year (“FY”) 2017 and seven requirements for FY 2018 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grants (“Byrne JAG”), herein referred to as the “Immigration Enforcement Requirements.” The Immigration Enforcement Requirements at issue are found in paragraphs 52, 53, 54, 55, and 56 of Exhibit C to the Request for Judicial Notice filed by Defendants as ECF No. 15 at pages 62-66, in paragraphs 52, 53, 54, 55, and 56 of Exhibit D to ECF No. 15 at pages 91-95, and in paragraphs 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, and 47 of Exhibit E of ECF No. 15 at pages 116-122.

         2. On March 5, 2019, Defendants' filed Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 14) and Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice (ECF No. 15) (collectively, “Defendants' Motion”).

         3. On April 8, 2019, Plaintiffs filed Plaintiffs' Combined Motion for Summary Judgment and Response to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 21) and supporting declarations and exhibits (ECF Nos. 22-25) (collectively, “Plaintiffs' Motion”).

         4. On July 26, 2019, the Court held a hearing on Defendants' Motion and Plaintiffs' Motion and heard the arguments by counsel.

         5. On August 8, 2019, the Court issued its Opinion and Order (ECF No. 36) denying Defendants' Motion and granting Plaintiffs' Motion in part. The Court concluded that Plaintiffs have standing to pursue their claims and that Plaintiffs' claims are ripe for judicial review. The Court further concluded that Defendants lack the delegated authority to impose the Immigration Enforcement Requirements and that by doing so, Defendants infringed upon the authority reserved to Congress under the Spending Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Finally, the Court found that 8 U.S.C. §§ 1373 and 1644 violate the Tenth Amendment.

         Based on its findings and conclusions, and pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58, the Court hereby ENTERS judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants, and grants the following relief as set forth below:

         DECLARATION

         The Court concludes that declaratory relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2201 is appropriate in this case. It is hereby DECLARED that:

         1. The Immigration Enforcement Requirements are unconstitutional and unlawful because they exceed the congressional authority conferred on the Executive Branch and are ultra vires on their face.

         2. 8 U.S.C. §§ 1373 and 1644 are unconstitutional on their face under the Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

         PERMANENT ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.