Dwyer and Rhyu, both based in Cooley Godward's Palo Alto,
Calif., office, led a pro bono team that filed suit in 2004 to
compel the DHS and Department of Justice to issue green cards-"in a
timely manner" to lawful permanent residents who had passed
security screenings but lacked the documentation to prove
Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
For John C. Dwyer, representing immigrants denied proof of their lawful status was a practical matter: He is a member of Cooley Godward’s pro bono committee and was looking for a meaningful case. For his colleague, Michelle S. Rhyu, the pro bono litigation bore a more personal appeal. A native of Korea who arrived in the United States with her family when she was 4, Rhyu empathized with the plaintiffs’ frustrations. “They played by the rules and had gone through the system, but they were unable to get documentation,” she said. “For me, it was a great, compelling case for helping people who are pretty removed from the system but are wronged.” Dwyer and Rhyu, both based in Cooley Godward’s Palo Alto, Calif., office, led a pro bono team that filed suit in 2004 to compel the Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice to issue proof of lawful status-commonly known as green cards-”in a timely manner” to lawful permanent residents who had passed security screenings but lacked the documentation to prove it. Without proof of legal residency, some plaintiffs were fired from jobs or forbidden from traveling outside the United States. Before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the documentation took about a week to obtain once the applicant was deemed qualified. Following the attacks, some lawful permanent residents waited for more than a year. Rhyu and Dwyer estimated that as many as 12,539 people who held lawful permanent resident status since Oct. 1, 2000, were unable to get the documentation they needed. The class action claimed the Department of Homeland Security’s post-Sept. 11 policy was “arbitrary and capricious.” Santillan v. Gonzales, No. C-04-2686 MHP (N.D. Calif.). Government attorneys claimed that the delays were justified due to heightened security measures. But U.S. District Judge Marilyn Hall Patel found the lags to be unreasonable and a violation of the department’s duty to provide timely documentation of status. She granted the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment last August and ordered the defendants to develop a plan to speed up processing. Mark C. Walters, assistant director of the Justice Department’s office of immigration litigation, was lead counsel for the defense. He said he could not comment because the case was still open pending a final plan. One of the plaintiffs’ biggest challenges was making their case without appearing to undermine national security. “It was very important for us to make sure the case was not about national security,” Rhyu said. “It was about bureaucracy.”
PRO BONO AWARDS
This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.
To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.
LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.
ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.
With this subscription you will receive unlimited access to high quality, online, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry. This is perfect for attorneys licensed in multiple jurisdictions or for attorneys that have fulfilled their CLE requirement but need to access resourceful information for their practice areas.
Our Team Account subscription service is for legal teams of four or more attorneys. Each attorney is granted unlimited access to high quality, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry along with administrative access to easily manage CLE for the entire team.
Gain access to some of the most knowledgeable and experienced attorneys with our 2 bundle options! Our Compliance bundles are curated by CLE Counselors and include current legal topics and challenges within the industry. Our second option allows you to build your bundle and strategically select the content that pertains to your needs. Both options are priced the same.
Dynamically explore and compare data on law firms, companies, individual lawyers, and industry trends.
Exclusive Depth and Reach.
Legal Compass includes access to our exclusive industry reports, combining the unmatched expertise of our analyst team with ALM’s deep bench of proprietary information to provide insights that can’t be found anywhere else.
Big Pictures and Fine Details
Legal Compass delivers you the full scope of information, from the rankings of the Am Law 200 and NLJ 500 to intricate details and comparisons of firms’ financials, staffing, clients, news and events.
Sponsored by: NAM (National Arbitration and Mediation)
Webcast Date: Thursday, December 12, 2019 | **EARN CLE FOR THIS EVENT** | Join this webcast, and earn 1.0 CLE credit (General Skills)*, Join this webcast for insight into the mediation process and how it can be leveraged to resolve disputes and retain business relationships.
As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters.
Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss.
Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.