Georgetown Law Center on Privacy & Technology v. CBP

Georgetown Law Center on Privacy & Technology, et al., v. CBP, et al., No. 1:25-cv-01732 (D.D.C., filed June 2, 2025)

On August 1, 2024, Plaintiffs Georgetown Law Center on Privacy & Technology, Amica Center for Immigrant Rights, and Americans for Immigrant Justice submitted two Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to defendants Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seeking records related to the agencies’ policies and practices on the collection and use of noncitizen DNA. The agencies failed to make a determination on the FOIA requests and failed to produce the responsive records within the time prescribed by FOIA, leading plaintiffs to file suit on June 2, 2025.

The lawsuit comes amid a widespread immigration crackdown by the administration and increased surveillance efforts. Plaintiff organizations allege that the agencies have not been transparent about their rapidly-expanding program of genetic data collection from migrants, including children. The suit expresses mounting concerns about both the scale and lack of oversight of DNA collection practices.

Documents:

Counsel: Amica Center for Immigrant Rights ǀ Georgetown University Law Center ǀ Americans for Immigrant Justice

Contact: Amelia Dagen ǀ Amica Center for Immigrant Rights ǀ amelia@amicacenter.org
Stevie Glaberson ǀ Georgetown University Law Center ǀ stephanie.glaberson@georgetown.edu

Press:

FTCA Wrongful Death Administrative Complaint for 8-Year-Old Anadith Danay Reyes Alvarez

Eight-year-old Anadith was born with sickle cell disease (SCD) and a heart condition. At five years old, she had open heart surgery to repair a heart defect. On May 9, 2023, Anadith’s parents crossed the U.S.-Mexico border with Anadith and her two older siblings—fleeing discrimination and persecution in Honduras as Afro-Indigenous people. Shortly after crossing, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) arrested the family. Anadith’s mother Mabel told a CBP officer about Anadith’s medical condition and provided medical records of her heart defect. Mabel repeated this information upon medical intake. While in CBP custody, Anadith contracted the flu, but CBP did not seek emergency treatment from a doctor, despite her condition. By May 16, 2023, Anadith’s fever reached nearly 105 degrees, but CBP refused Mabel’s request to call an ambulance. On May 17, Anadith and Mabel visited the CBP medical station at least four times—but each time the providers refused to call an ambulance. After the fourth visit, Mabel carried Anadith—who could not walk—and felt the girl die in her arms. Only then did CBP call an ambulance—and refused to allow Mabel to ride with her daughter, instead forcing her to ride in a separate car with CBP. Anadith was pronounced dead at the hospital. In May 2024, the Texas Civil Rights Project and Haitian Bridge Alliance filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit to obtain the medical records and other documents related to Anadith while in CBP custody.

On May 1, 2025, Anadith’s parents—Mabel and Rossel—submitted an administrative claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) alleging that CBP was negligent and recklessly or intentionally inflicted emotional distress on Anadith and her family. They seek compensation.

Documents:

Counsel: Texas Civil Rights Project ǀ Haitian Bridge Alliance

Contact: Kassandra Gonzalez ǀ Texas Civil Rights Project ǀ kassandra@texascivilrightsproject.org

Press:

Florence Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project, et. al. v. Dept. of Health and Human Services, et. al.

Florence Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project, Center, et al. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, et al., No. 1:24-cv-6740 (S.D.N.Y., filed Sept. 5, 2024)

The Florence Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project, Center for Constitutional Rights, and an individual, L.B., filed a complaint on September 5, 2024, after the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) did not comply with their Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. The plaintiffs requested documents under FOIA regarding HHS’s, CBP’s, ICE’s, and DHS’s radiograph practices and policies in June 2024. Specifically, plaintiffs are seeking information about defendants solely relying on dental radiographs to determine the age of unaccompanied minor children. This practice is alleged to be a violation of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) which requires defendants to rely on more than radiographs to determine the age of children. This determination is significant because using only the radiographs can lead to incorrect determinations of children as adults and result in their placement in adult immigrant detention centers. Placing the children in adult facilities deprives them of the additional benefits children receive in custody, such as access to education, counseling, and less restrictive settings.

After a telephone conference on May 27, 2025, the court ordered defendants to file a letter brief and declaration addressing the processing schedule for the requested records of both CBP and HHS, as well as briefing on addressing the legality of using a reduction in force at HHS (including terminations and/or placements on administrative leave) as a basis for delaying the processing and production of records pursuant to FOIA. As of August 2025, the parties continue to file joint status reports and production is ongoing.

Documents:

Counsel: Center for Constitutional Rights ǀ Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project

Contact: Laura Belous (lbelous@firrp.org) | Rocio Castaneda (rcastaneda@firrp.org)

Press:

ACLU v. ICE

ACLU v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, et al., No. 1:24-cv-07444 (S.D.NY., filed Oct. 2, 2024)

The ACLU filed a suit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) on October 2, 2024, against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and the Department of Justice (DOJ) after the departments failed to produce requested documents by the deadline under FOIA (20 working days). The ACLU is requesting documents related to detention management and care as well as deportation practices. Specifically, the ACLU requested CBP’s documents related to the transportation of individuals between detention centers and airports during deportation proceedings, including the transportation of unaccompanied minors; U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE’s) records of detention facility bed availability and commercial lodging practices; DHS’s policies between CBP, ICE, and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS); and any legal memoranda related to the “mass influx” provision, 8 U.S.C. section 1103(a)(10), from DHS and DOJ. Defendants filed their answer to the complaint on November 12, 2024, and as of September 2025 continue to file status reports with the court while production in response to the initial FOIA requests is ongoing.

Documents:

Counsel: Goodwin Procter LLP ǀ ACLU

Contact: Kyle Virgien | kvirgien@aclu.org

Julian Sanchez Mora, et al., v. CBP, et. al.

Julian Sanchez Mora, et al., v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Department of Homeland Security, No. 3:24-cv-02430 (N.D. Cal., filed Apr. 24, 2024) and No. 1:24-cv-03136 (D.D.C., docketed Nov. 5, 2024)

Three immigration attorneys and two individual plaintiffs are suing U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for failing to make a determination on each plaintiff’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the 20 or, at most, 30 business days mandated by FOIA. Two plaintiffs had FOIA requests pending for over a year and a half at the time the complaint was filed. Because CBP engages in a nationwide pattern and practice of failing to make a determination on individual FOIA requests within the statutory timeframe, plaintiffs seek to represent a nationwide class of similarly situated FOIA requestors who must wait for prolonged periods for determinations on their requests.

In addition to class certification, plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief ordering CBP to respond to FOIA requests for an individual’s records that have been pending for more than 30 business days without a determination and ordering CBP to make timely determinations as required by FOIA. Significant delays in FOIA productions often mean that immigrants and their attorneys are unable to know crucial information for immigration cases, such as when the individual traveled, if the individual was subject to any inspections, if the individual was ever deported, or any other meaningful action that could impact their ability to make an effective defense and to apply for status.

On July 15, 2024, defendants filed a motion to transfer or dismiss the case, arguing lack of jurisdiction and improper venue in the Northern District of California. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on August 2 clarifying why jurisdiction and venue in that district were proper. However, on November 4, 2024, the court granted defendants’ motion, dismissing plaintiffs’ FOIA claim against DHS and transferring the case to the District Court for the District of Columbia. Plaintiffs filed a motion to reconsider the dismissal of the FOIA claim against Defendant DHS on January 31, which was granted by the D.C. District Court on June 18, 2025, and the FOIA claim reinstated.

On September 12, 2025, plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification in the D.C. District Court. Defendants oppose the motion and have requested extensions of time to answer.

Documents:

Counsel:

National Immigration Litigation Alliance ǀ Northwest Immigrant Rights Project ǀ Van Der Hout LLP

Contact: Matt Adams ǀ Northwest Immigrant Rights Project ǀ matt@nwirp.org

American Immigration Council v. CBP and DHS

American Immigration Council v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Department of Homeland Security, No. 1:21-cv-03314 (D.D.C., filed Dec. 20, 2021)

The American Immigration Council filed suit against U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in December 2021 for their failure to respond to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking records related to the agency’s implementation and use of the CBP One mobile application. CBP developed CBP One to collect information about individuals who interact with CBP, and launched the app in 2020. Since that time, CBP has added different functions to the app, including allowing asylum seekers to schedule inspection appointments via the app. However, apart from limited information available on its website, CBP has failed to provide easily accessible and consistent information to the public about CBP One, including other current or future uses for the app and any plans to use, sell, or distribute the information it collects through the app.

In September 2023, CBP agreed to publish past versions of the Department of Homeland Security’s Privacy Impact Assessments on CBP One. The assessments describe additional app features not listed on the CBP webpage. CBP agreed to post these assessments, which provide vital insight on the functions of the app, in the agency’s FOIA library. Agencies’ FOIA libraries—or Reading Rooms—are designated webpages where the public can view agency documents without the need to file a request under FOIA.

Documents:

Counsel:

Raul Pinto ǀ American Immigration Council ǀ rpinto@immcouncil.org

Skylight Engagement and AIC v. DHS and CBP

Skylight Engagement, Inc. and American Immigration Council v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Customs and Border Protection, No. 1:21-cv-00922 (E.D.N.Y., filed Feb. 19, 2021)

Skylight Engagement, a nonprofit human rights media organization, and the American Immigration Council filed a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) on February 19, 2021, seeking records from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) regarding their actions at and around a humanitarian aid station near Arivaca, Arizona in 2017 and 2020.

The records sought include information on three aggressive raids conducted by CBP on the aid station, located about 11 miles from the U.S.-Mexico border and intended to provide aid to migrants who have crossed the border and are at risk due to the extremely hot and dry climate. The aid station was organized and operated by No More Deaths/No Más Muertes, a humanitarian organization that supplies medical care, food, and water to migrants.

CBP raided the Arivaca aid station on June 15, 2017, July 31, 2020, and again on October 5, 2020. During these raids, CBP interrogated, detained, and arrested individuals at the aid station in an aggressive manner. Plaintiffs filed an administrative FOIA request on October 14, 2020, seeking CBP records regarding the raids, but did not receive responsive records. In particular, the request sought video footage, photographs, or other media that CBP recorded documenting their actions during the raids, as well as communication and correspondence regarding the raids, including records related to search warrants.

On May 19, 2023, the parties stipulated to dismiss the suit after Defendants released records requested by Plaintiffs. The case was dismissed on June 5, 2023.

Documents:

Counsel:

Raul Pinto ǀ American Immigration Council ǀ rpinto@immcouncil.org

Access Now v. CBP

Access Now v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, No. 1:24-cv-03979 (S.D.N.Y., filed May 23, 2024)

A digital rights advocacy organization—Access Now—and the Harvard Cyberlaw Clinic are suing U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) for failing to produce records related to personal data the agency collects via its CBP One app.

According to an internal CBP One privacy impact assessment cited by the lawsuit, the app can collect biographical information, images, and geolocation. In February 2024, CBP disclosed on the Federal Register that the app also will begin gathering biometric information from nonimmigrants leaving the country, who will now be required to provide photos with geolocation data to prove they have left the United States.

The complaint alleges that CBP One can use the data it gathers for automated decision making, profiling, and registering people on the move. The lawsuit seeks records documenting how the app functions and the number of people in the Mexican, Guatemalan, Honduran, and Salvadoran governments who access CBP One to obtain data about migrants.

Access Now is an international organization that defends and extends the digital rights of people and communities at risk around the world. Access Now does not provide legal advice to migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, and other people on the move.

CBP filed its answer on August 2, 2024. On October 10, 2024, Access Now issued a press release that CBP has released 2,912 pages of documents in response to Plaintiffs’ FOIA request, and is reviewing the documents to assess adequate compliance.

Documents:

Counsel: Mason A. Kortz ǀ Harvard Law School Cyberlaw Clinic

Contact: Access Now ǀ equipolac@accessnow.org

Press:

Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center v. CBP

Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center, et al., v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, No. 2:24-cv-03815 (C.D. Cal., filed May 8, 2024); No. 1:24-cv-01956 (D. Colo., transferred July 16, 2024)

Al Otro Lado, the Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center, and the Texas Civil Rights Project filed a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) in the Central District of California to compel the government to release information about its policies and practices related to the CBP One app and to asylum-seekers with disabilities.

The government has forced asylum-seekers to use the CBP One App since May 2023 — when Title 42 was lifted — to schedule asylum interviews with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials at U.S. ports of entry. The lawsuit comes after a report by Human Rights Watch criticized the app as a modern-day form of metering to keep asylum-seekers from crossing ports of entry. The suit also seeks information as it relates to discrimination of asylum-seekers with disabilities. The complaint alleges that the government has not provided the information the groups requested in administrative FOIA requests.

The lawsuit notes that CBP One requires a smartphone and a high level of technological proficiency to install and use, and alleges that the application is prone to frequent glitches and other technical issues. This in turn leads to discriminatory practices against individuals with disabilities and unequal access to the asylum process for anyone experiencing barriers to downloading and using the app.

Specifically, the lawsuit seeks from CBP all final agency opinions and orders, policies, interpretations, and administrative staff manuals and instructions concerning Technology Accessibility for persons with disabilities as that information relates to CBP One.

On July 15, 2024, the court, after the parties jointly stipulated, transferred the case to the District of Colorado, and CBP filed its answer on July 31, 2024. Production is now ongoing.

Documents:

Contact: Laura Murchie ǀ Disability Rights United ǀ lmurchie@creeclaw.org
Jeremy Jong ǀ Al Otro Lado ǀ jeremy@alotrolado.org

Press:

Texas Civil Rights Project v. CBP

Texas Civil Rights Project v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, No. 1:24-cv-00535 (W.D. Tex., filed May 17, 2024)

The Texas Civil Rights Project (TCRP) and Haitian Bridge Alliance filed a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) after U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) failed to respond to administrative requests for information that the organizations filed in October 2023 regarding the death of an 8-year-old girl who died in CBP custody.

Anadith Danay Reyes Alvarez was held for eight days in CBP custody with her family after they crossed into the country at Brownsville. She was in medical isolation at a CBP detention facility in Harlingen, Texas for high fever and the flu when she suffered cardiac arrest and passed away on May 17, 2023. The medical isolation unit at the facility was shut down following her death.

TCRP says CBP failed to respond to a request for expedited processing and explicitly denied their administrative request to produce records regarding the incident. According to the lawsuit, Reyes and her family were members of the Afro-indigenous Garifuna community in Honduras who have suffered an ongoing history of anti-Black and anti-Indigenous discrimination. The family previously fled to Panama for refuge, where Anadith was born, and then subsequently to the United States.

Litigation deadlines are stayed as CBP produces documents responsive to the complaint.

Documents:

Contact:

Karla Marisol Vargas ǀ Texas Civil Rights Project ǀ KVargas@texascivilrightsproject.org

Press:

Sandra Sanchez, Groups sue to get info on child who died in CBP custody in South Texas, Border Report, May 17, 2024.