article: On February 7, 2013, four immigrants born in Mexico with prior arrests for alleged violations of an Alabama state law prohibiting fishing without a license filed this class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama. The plaintiffs sued the Alabama Department of Homeland Security ("ADHS") and Alabama's Administrative Office of the Court ("AOC") under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiffs, represented by the ACLU, SPLC, NILC, and private counsel, challenged enforcement of HB 658 § 5, which required the AOC to compile the names and identifying information of undocumented immigrants who had been detained for any violation of state law and ADHS to post that information for the public on its website. They sought a declaratory judgment that the enforcement of HB 658 § 5 violated the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the U.S. Constitution and the Due Process Clause of Amendment XIV of the U.S. Constitution and to enjoin the defendants from enforcing HB 658 § 5. Specifically, the plaintiffs claimed that Section 5 of H.B. 658 Act No. 2012-491, which is codified as Ala. Code § 31-13-32, was preempted by federal law in violation of the Supremacy Clause, and also violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Section 5 of HB 658 required the AOC to compile, and the ADHS post on its public website, the names and other identifying information of "unlawfully present alien[s]" who were detained for any violation of state law and who then appeared in a state court. The four plaintiffs feared that their prior arrests and scheduled appearance in court for fishing without a license would enable the defendants to publicize their names on this list that would result in various consequences such as the denial of bail, denial of employment opportunities, and a significant loss of privacy. The proposed class certification was: "All persons who are or will be subject to Section 5 of HB 658, Ala. Code § 31-13-32". On February 8, 2013, the case was reassigned from District Court Judge W. Harold Albritton, III to U.S. District Judge William Keith Watkins. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Charles S. Coody. On July 31, 2013, the defendants' motion to dismiss was granted by Judge Watkins. The court identified the following impediments to the plaintiffs’ standing: (1) the plaintiffs failed to allege that they were "unlawfully present aliens" subject to the consequences prescribed by Ala. Code § 31-13-32, the state law which they challenged as unconstitutional; and (2) the plaintiffs failed to allege that they were "unlawfully present aliens" at the crucial times identified by the law – i.e., when they were detained by law enforcement and when they appeared in court for a violation of state law. Without asserting they were unlawfully present aliens, the plaintiffs could not show that they faced the threat of imminent injury. The court afforded the plaintiffs leave to amend their complaint to cure these impediments to standing. The plaintiffs did not amend their complaint, but filed a motion requesting that the court reconsider and vacate its July 31, 2013 opinion and order. On January 6, 2014, the motion for reconsideration was granted and the order of July 31, 2013 was vacated as the plaintiffs should not have been required to plead that they were in fact "unlawfully present aliens." On May 4, 2014, Judge Watkins granted the defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of standing because the plaintiffs failed to allege that they were unlawfully present aliens. The plaintiffs requested reconsideration of that ruling. The court granted the plaintiffs' motion to reconsider, reinstated the previously pending motions, and directed the parties to submit supplemental briefing. On May 20, 2014, Judge Watkins granted the plaintiffs' request to withhold their identities from the public but not from the defendants. On July 3, 2014, Judge Watkins denied the class certification without prejudice with leave to refile on or before September 5, 2014. The parties began mediation proceedings on September 11, 2014, and they eventually reached a private settlement agreement. Under the settlement, the AOC agreed not to forward information it collected under § 31-13-32 to other government agencies except the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency; in turn, the Agency promised not to publish the § 31-13-32 information it received from the AOC. On October 10, 2014, the judge dismissed the case but retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement's terms. The agreement was to be in effect for 5 years (from October 2014 until October 2019), and there has been no further activity on the docket since October 2014. Because the agreement expired in 2019, the case is presumably now closed.
summary: Four immigrants born in Mexico with prior arrests for alleged violation of an Alabama state law filed a class action lawsuit alleging that that their prior arrests and scheduled appearances in court would enable defendants to publicize the plaintiffs' names on the online list pursuant to Alabama's legislation of HB 658 §5 of "unlawfully present aliens". The parties entered a settlement agreement set to end in 2019.