Immigrants' Rights

California is home to more immigrants than any other state in the country. The ACLU of Northern California works to defend immigrants’ constitutional rights, end immigration detention, and stop state and local law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.

Outline of the State of California overlaid with pictures of activists holding signs saying "Keep families together" and "Keep communities whole" and a plane flying over barbed wire

The Latest

Press Release
supreme court with crowd

SCOTUS Gives Trump Administration Carte Blanche to Strip More Than a Million People of their Legal Status With No Oversight

Court greenlights Trump administration's termination of TPS for Syria and Haiti and eliminated most judicial review of TPS decision-making
Court Cases: Mullin v. Dahlia Doe
Press Release
collage with courthouse columns, protestors with signs saying "ICE get out of court buildings" and "Due process for everyone"

Federal Court Strikes Down Courthouse Arrests Nationwide

The ruling, a major blow to the Trump administration deportation agenda, also restores protections against inhumane detention
Issue Areas: Immigrants' Rights
News & Commentary
Image of a court house

Petición de Hábeas Corpus Presentada por Derecho Propio para Determinadas Personas Detenidas por ICE en Golden State Annex, Mesa Verde, California City o Central Valley Annex

Las personas detenidas por el Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas de los Estados Unidos que no tienen a un abogado pueden presentar una petición de habeas corpus para impugnar su detención.
News & Commentary
Image of a court house

Guide to File a Pro Se Habeas Petition for People Detained by ICE in Golden State Annex, Mesa Verde, California City, or Central Valley Annex Detention Facilities

Individuals detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement who do not have a lawyer may file a habeas petition to challenge their detention.
Court Case
April 15, 2026

Mullin v. Dahlia Doe

Mullin v. Dahlia Doe challenged the Trump administration’s decision to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for thousands of Syrian immigrants living and working legally in the United States while it is unsafe for them to return to their home country. The case was consolidated with Trump v. Miot, a case concerning Haitian TPS holders. The Supreme Court expedited the case for judicial review, granting certiorari before judgment based on a preliminary ruling from the district court. In its Supreme Court’s June 25, 2026 6-3 ruling, the Court allowed the TPS terminations of Syria and Haiti to proceed, resulting in the loss of legal status and the right to work for over 350,000 people. The Supreme Court held that there was no judicial review for the plaintiffs’ statutory claims; and that the constitutional equal protection claim was unlikely to succeed on the merits. 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 impacts not only Syrian and Haitian TPS holders but all 1.3 million individuals from 17 countries designated for TPS. At the time the Supreme Court heard this case on April 29, 2026, the Trump administration had terminated TPS for 13 countries—despite ongoing wars and undisputed humanitarian crises. Alongside our co-counsel the International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP), Muslim Advocates, Van Der Hout LLP, and the National ACLU, 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 subjects nearly 6,100 Syrian TPS holders, along with 800 Syrians with pending applications, to immigrant detention and possible deportation to an unsafe country. The Miot case, consolidated with Doe, affects 350,000 Haitian TPS holders. The plaintiffs argued 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. The Supreme Court adopted the government’s extreme position that even lawless decisions that violated clear statutory mandates were not reviewable.
Court Case
October 11, 2025

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
June 24, 2026

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
July 9, 2025

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.