General legal strategy and draft complaint to challenge Trump’s planned mass deportations for January 21, 2025.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
District of Colombia

[National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian leaders,
Plaintiffs,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,
U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT (ICE),
Defendants.

Case No. [Insert Case Number]
Class Action Complaint

INTRODUCTION

1. This is a class action lawsuit challenging the legality and constitutionality of a planned mass deportation program initiated by the Defendants, which targets millions of individuals residing in the United States, many of whom have lived, worked, and contributed to American society for years.
2. Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent the unlawful deportation of individuals based on arbitrary and capricious policies that violate the U.S. Constitution, including due process, equal protection, and separation of powers.

PARTIES

1. Plaintiffs: Plaintiffs are individuals who are at risk of deportation under the challenged policy, as well as advocacy organizations and legal entities representing immigrant communities. They are all current or prospective beneficiaries of the protections afforded by U.S. law and have standing to bring this case.
2. Lead plaintiff, National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders (“CONLAMIC’), has for over 15 years advocated for immigration reform throughout the USA and initiated lawsuits challenging anti-discriminatory actions. https://clearinghouse.net/case/13050/; https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/oklahoma/okndce/4:2007cv00613/25565/33/; https://clearinghouse.net/case/5517/
3. Lead Plaintiff is engaging with other civil rights and religious organizations of all faiths, including Jewish and Muslim organizations, in filing this lawsuit.
4. There will also be named plaintiffs from all religious denominations included in the class action.
5. Defendants:

• The United States of America, through its agencies and officials, including the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and their officers and employees responsible for the implementation of the deportation program.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, as this case involves questions of federal law, including constitutional claims arising under the U.S. Constitution.
2. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because Defendants’ actions have nationwide effect and because the policies at issue apply to individuals and entities in this district.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

1. On [date], former President Donald J. Trump, in anticipation of resuming office in 2025, announced a policy to carry out mass deportations of undocumented individuals living in the United States, including but not limited to [specific groups, e.g., families, workers, students, etc.].
2. The proposed mass deportation includes the forcible removal of individuals without due process, including arbitrary detention and deportation, regardless of long-term residency, family connections, and other factors relevant to the exercise of prosecutorial discretion.https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2nrg4deyjo;https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/18/trump-military-mass-deportation; https://www.npr.org/2024/11/12/nx-s1-5181962/trump-promises-a-mass-deportation-on-day-1-what-might-that-look-like; https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-confirms-plan-declare-national-emergency-military-mass/story?id=115963448
3. The proposed policy has been condemned by experts in immigration law, constitutional law, human rights, and public policy, who warn that such a policy would result in widespread harm to individuals, families, and communities.
4. Many affected individuals are members of protected classes, including children, workers, students, and those with longstanding ties to the United States. Others have been granted relief from deportation under existing immigration programs, such as Temporary Protected Status (TPS), Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), and others.

CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

Count I: Violation of the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause

1. The Fifth Amendment guarantees that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. Defendants’ planned mass deportation program violates the due process rights of individuals by:

• Failing to provide adequate notice and opportunity to challenge deportation before an impartial tribunal;
• Failing to provide a meaningful opportunity for individuals to assert claims for relief, such as asylum, family unity, or other protections under U.S. immigration law;
• Conducting deportations in a manner that lacks transparency, procedural safeguards, and a fair process.

1. As a result of these procedural deficiencies, the proposed mass deportation violates Plaintiffs’ constitutional right to due process under the Fifth Amendment.

Count II: Violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fifth Amendment

1. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fifth Amendment guarantees that no person shall be denied equal protection of the laws. Defendants’ mass deportation program is discriminatory in nature, targeting individuals based on arbitrary and overly broad classifications such as national origin, immigration status, and lack of citizenship.
2. Defendants’ policy disproportionately impacts Latino, Asian, and Black immigrant communities, violating their right to equal protection under the law by subjecting them to harsher treatment and depriving them of their fundamental rights without adequate justification.

Count III: Violation of Separation of Powers

1. The separation of powers doctrine prohibits the executive branch from exercising powers that are vested in Congress, including the power to regulate immigration. While the executive has some discretion in immigration enforcement, Defendants’ planned mass deportation program exceeds the scope of executive authority by enacting a blanket policy of removal without regard to Congress’s legislative framework or established procedures.
2. Defendants’ actions violate the separation of powers by exercising executive power in a manner inconsistent with congressional intent and existing immigration law, undermining the system of checks and balances that is central to the U.S. Constitution.

Count IV: Violation of International Law and Human Rights

1. Defendants’ planned deportations are contrary to the principles of international law, including the prohibition of arbitrary detention and deportation. The United States is a party to various international treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which protects individuals from arbitrary removal, and the Convention Against Torture, which prohibits deportation to countries where individuals face a risk of torture or persecution.
2. The Defendants’ deportation policy, as currently proposed, violates international law by removing individuals without sufficient consideration of their personal circumstances and the human rights violations they may face upon return to their countries of origin.

CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS

1. This action is brought on behalf of a class of individuals who are at risk of being unlawfully deported under the Defendants’ mass deportation policy.
2. The class consists of all individuals who are subject to deportation under the challenged policy and who, as a result, face a serious risk of harm to their constitutional rights.
3. The issues in this case are common to all members of the class, including the question of whether the Defendants’ actions violate the due process, equal protection, and separation of powers provisions of the U.S. Constitution.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court:

A. Certify this case as a class action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23;

B. Issue a declaratory judgment that Defendants’ planned mass deportation policy violates the U.S. Constitution, including the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses;

C. Enjoin Defendants from implementing or enforcing the mass deportation policy;

D. Award Plaintiffs their reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs under 42 U.S.C. § 1988;

E. Grant any further relief that the Court deems just and proper.

Dated: [December 1, 2024]
Respectfully submitted,
[William J. Sanchez]
[WJSPA.]
[13590 SW 134 Avenue Suite 209

Miami, FL 33186
[305–232–8889]
[william@wsanchezlaw.com]