All Cases

31 Court Cases
Court Case
Apr 15, 2026
people at the CA state capitol holding signs that say "keep communities whole" and "keep families together"
  • Immigrants' Rights|
  • +1 Issue

Mullin v. Dahlia Doe

On April 29, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Mullin v. Dahlia Doe, a case challenging the Trump administration’s attempt to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for thousands of Syrian immigrants living and working legally in the United States. The case could affect the future of the entire TPS program, which has been a target of the Trump administration and its openly racist mass deportation agenda. TPS is a program established by Congress in 1990 to protect individuals who cannot safely return to their home country due to war, natural disaster, or other emergencies. TPS holders are mothers, fathers, workers, and contributing members of their communities. They rely on this humanitarian protection regime for safety. The Supreme Court’s ruling will impact not only Syrian TPS holders but will also affect whether the Trump administration can move forward with its actions seeking to strip legal status from many others. There are 1.3 million individuals from 17 countries designated for TPS. At the time the Supreme Court will be hearing this case, the Trump administration has terminated TPS for 13 countries—despite ongoing wars and undisputed humanitarian crises. Alongside our co-counsel the International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP), Muslim Advocates, and Van Der Hout LLP, the ACLU of Northern California represents seven Syrian nationals with TPS or pending applications in Mullin v. Dahlia Doe, a class action lawsuit originally filed in October 2025. Cancelling TPS designation for Syria would subject nearly 6,100 Syrian TPS holders, along with 800 Syrians with pending applications, to immigrant detention and possible deportation to an unsafe country. The plaintiffs argue that the DHS Secretary does not have the legal authority to unilaterally override the TPS statute enacted by Congress, and that it is the role of the judiciary to review the government’s legally dubious actions.
Court Case
Jan 29, 2026
hands behind bars
  • Immigrants' Rights

Pablo Sequen, et al. v. Albarran, et al.

We filed a class-action lawsuit challenging the Trump administration's policy of arresting immigrants when they appear for court in Northern California and holding them in inhumane conditions inside the San Francisco ICE field office.
Court Case
Jan 21, 2026
drone flying overhead
  • Privacy and Technology

Schmitz, et al. v. Permit Sonoma, et al.

The ACLU Foundation of Northern California has filed a lawsuit to block Sonoma County code inspectors from using drones to conduct surveillance of people's homes without a warrant.
Court Case
Jan 21, 2026
A hand pressing button on a digital door lock
  • Privacy and Technology

San Francisco Tenants Union, et al. v. Smart Rent, et al.

The ACLU filed a lawsuit in San Francisco Superior Court today to protect tenants' privacy rights from landlords who force renters to allow AI-powered surveillance technology in their homes
Court Case
Jan 20, 2026
Cartoon grid with cars, location pins and license plate, which are overlooked by a camera and a law enforcement officer
  • Privacy and Technology|
  • +1 Issue

SIREN, et al. v. City of San Jose, et al.

The ACLU of Northern California and the Electronic Frontier Foundation filed suit in Santa Clara County Superior Court against the City of San Jose and others to challenge San Jose police officers’ practice of searching for location information collected by automated license plate readers (ALPRs) without first getting a warrant.
Court Case
Oct 11, 2025
courthouse exterior
  • Immigrants' Rights

Garro Pinchi, et al. v. Noem, et al.

We filed a class-action lawsuit challenging the Trump administration's policy of re-arresting and re-detaining immigrants the government previously had released from custody after concluding they were neither dangerous nor a flight risk.
Court Case
Jul 09, 2025
Image of TPS advocate by Sam Comen, www.samcomen.com
  • Immigrants' Rights

National TPS Alliance v. Noem (NTPSA II)

National TPS Alliance v. Noem (NTPSA II) is a legal challenge to the Trump administration’s unlawful efforts to dismantle the statutorily mandated Temporary Protected Status (TPS) program for Nepal, Honduras, and Nicaragua, which provides humanitarian protection for people who cannot safely return to their home countries.
Court Case
Mar 24, 2025
Silver handcuffs against black background.
  • Criminal Law Reform

In re: Adkins (Petition for Habeas Corpus)

We're challenging the governor's authority to reverse parole as a violation of the rights of young people.
Court Case
Mar 05, 2025
Statue of Liberty
  • Immigrants' Rights

National TPS Alliance v. Noem

On February 19, 2025, the National TPS Alliance and seven Venezuelan TPS holders sued the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to challenge the vacatur of the previously ordered extension of TPS for Venezuela, and the subsequent termination. On March 20, 2025, the plaintiffs amended the complaint to also challenge the vacatur of the full TPS extension for 500,000 Haitians, with four Haitian TPS holders joining as plaintiffs. The plaintiffs are represented by the National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON), the ACLU Foundations of Northern California and Southern California, the Center for Immigration Law and Policy (CILP) at UCLA School of Law, and the Haitian Bridge Alliance.