Roe 1 v. Trump (Muslim Ban)
The American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Northern California, the ACLU Foundations of California, and the ACLU National Immigrants’ Rights Project, along with Keker Van Nest & Peters LLP, sued President Donald J. Trump, the Department of State, the Department of Homeland Security, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection for establishing and enforcing an unconstitutional and discriminatory Muslim ban. Roe 1 v. Trump was originally filed as Al-Mowafak v. Trump on Feb. 2, 2017
Plaintiff Jane Roe is a United States citizen and a resident of California who was recently married to a Syrian national living in the United Arab Emirates. The ban prevents her from being united with her husband and celebrating their marriage with friends and family in the United States.
Plaintiff John Doe is a lawful permanent resident in the United States and a native of Iran. His wife lives in Iran and is now barred entry due to the ban.
Plaintiff Jane Roe 2 is a woman from Uganda who was admitted to the United States as a refugee and currently lives in California. Roe 2 was forced to leave her infant daughter with family in Uganda as she fled to escape a homophobic mob intent on killing her. Roe 2 has applied to bring her now three-year-old daughter to the United States, but the Trump Administration’s ban is keeping them apart.
Plaintiff John Doe 2 is a United States citizen who fled Somalia after two of his brothers were killed. Doe 2’s mother and surviving brother also fled the violence, and are currently living in an Ethiopian refugee camp. Doe 2’s family members were twice set to come to the United States through the United States Refugee Admissions Program, but have been blocked due to Defendant Trump’s previous executive orders. The Administration’s most recent ban blocks Somali and Muslim refugees like Doe 2’s family members from coming to the United States.
Jewish Family & Community Services East Bay (JFCS-EB) filed the original lawsuit and remain a party in the amended complaint. JFCS-EB has provided assistance to refugees, immigrants, and residents of the San Francisco Bay Area, particularly the East Bay, for more than a century.
The suit seeks to establish a plaintiff class and obtain relief on behalf of Californians with loved ones harmed by the ban on refugees. Plaintiffs also seek a declaration that the Executive Order is illegal and may not be enforced.
The suit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
The suit was dismissed in May 2019. Other cases challenging the Muslim Ban are proceeding. For more information visit our Interactive Timeline of the Muslim Ban.
Interactive Timeline of the Muslim Ban
Refugees and Their Loved Ones Challenge Trump’s Muslim Ban in Court (Dec. 8. 2017)
Californians Sue in Challenge to Latest Muslim Ban (Mar. 13, 2017)
California Students Barred From Traveling, Sue Trump Over Muslim Ban (Feb. 2, 2017)