Immigrant Defenders Law Center v. Mullin

  • Immigrant Defenders Law Center v. Mullin

    Case Status:
    Open

    This case challenges the 2019-2021 implementation of the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), which forced asylum seekers to remain in Mexico while seeking asylum in the United States. MPP, as implemented, resulted in systematic denials of asylum seekers’ rights to apply for asylum, access counsel, and obtain a full and fair hearing, and prevented legal services organizations from providing such individuals with meaningful representation. In October 2026, a district court judge vacated MPP 1.0 as unlawful.

    Court and Case No.:

    U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, No. 2:20-cv-09893

    U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 25-2581

What is the government doing and why are we challenging it? 

In January 2019, the Trump administration launched the “Migrant Protection Protocols” (MPP), also known as “Remain in Mexico.” Under MPP, more than 68,000 people seeking asylum and related relief at the southern border were sent to dangerous border towns in Mexico during the pendency of their proceedings in U.S. immigration courts.

The vast majority of people placed in MPP were unable to access counsel, due to communication barriers in Mexico, DHS interference with access to counsel at the immigration courts, and the paucity of U.S. immigration attorneys willing to represent individuals subject to MPP. Abysmal conditions in Mexico, including the presence of organized criminal groups that target migrants for violence and kidnapping, further prevented applicants from attending their hearings or building their cases. In January 2025, the Trump administration announced that MPP would be reimplemented.

In this case, CGRS and our partners are challenging this original implementation of MPP (from 2019 to 2021), which deprived asylum seekers of their right to apply for asylum, their right to access counsel, and their rights under the First and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. CGRS is also challenging the January 2025 reimplementation of MPP.

What is at stake? 

CGRS is bringing this class action on behalf of a certified class defined as: “All individual subjected to MPP 1.0 prior to June 1, 2021, who remain outside the United States, and whose cases are currently not active due to termination of proceedings or a final removal order.”

The named plaintiffs are two legal services organizations that served asylum seekers enrolled at MPP and several individuals who were subjected to MPP. One of the plaintiffs, Dania Doe, fled El Salvador with her daughter after testifying against gang members. While waiting in Mexico for their court date, Dania and her daughter were kidnapped and held for 15 days by two armed men, who repeatedly raped Dania. When Dania contacted lawyers for help with her immigration case, they told her they couldn’t represent people in Mexico. After the judge denied Dania’s case for failing to provide evidence she didn’t know she needed, Dania was unable to file papers to appeal her case because she does not speak English.

Thousands of asylum seekers, like Dania and her daughter, faced severe harm because of MPP and never had a fair opportunity to have their claims for asylum considered.

What’s the status of this case? 

CGRS’s partners initiated this case in October 2020 and filed an updated complaint in December 2021. In March 2023, the district court certified the case as a class action and denied in part the government’s motion to dismiss.

In October 2026, the district court granted plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and vacated MPP. The court held that MPP violated the statutory right to seek asylum and be represented by counsel; violated due process and constitutional rights; and was arbitrary and capricious. The parties are awaiting the entry of final judgment by the court.  

Additionally, in January 2025, the Trump administration announced that it would reimplement MPP as it existed in 2019. On behalf of Plaintiff Immigrant Defenders Law Center, CGRS and our co-counsel swiftly moved for a stay, which the district court granted in April 2025. The Trump administration appealed the stay decision, and that appeal is currently pending with the Ninth Circuit. In the interim, the government may not enroll any of Plaintiff Immigrant Defenders Law Center’s current or future clients in MPP.

Who’s involved? 

CGRS is counsel along with the Southern Poverty Law Center, Innovation Law Lab, the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild, and Arnold & Porter LLP. In addition to the individual plaintiffs, CGRS and co-counsel are representing Immigrant Defenders Law Center and Jewish Family Service of San Diego as organizational plaintiffs.

How can you help? 

Take the Welcome With Dignity pledge and join our movement to defend the right to seek asylum. You can support CGRS’s vital work on cases like this one by making a donation.

For more information on the life-saving importance of access to asylum, please visit asylumsaveslives.org.

Need more information? 

Contact Brianna Krong, Communications and Advocacy Manager, at krongbrianna@uclawsf.edu.

Resources for Advocates 

CGRS has produced several resources to support attorneys representing clients impacted by policies affecting asylum seekers at the border. Click here to request materials relevant to your client’s case.

Press Releases

Select Media Coverage

Legal Documents