News

Posted by

PRESS RELEASE

Yemeni immigrants unlawfully barred by Trump’s executive order reunited with families in U.S.

After a nine-day ordeal sparked by President Trump’s January 27 executive order on immigration, Tareq and Ammar Aquel Mohammed Aziz, ages 21 and 19, have finally joined their father in the US. As was disclosed on February 3 in a federal court in Virginia, the brothers are two of the estimated 60,000–100,000 people whose valid visas were unlawfully revoked by the executive order, which took effect as the brothers were flying to the United States to live with their father, Aquel Aziz, who is a U.S. citizen residing in Michigan. After arriving on January 28, the brothers were coerced into signing an administrative form withdrawing their application for admission to the United States, and their valid visas were cancelled. Subsequently, they spent more than a week in legal limbo stranded at airports in Addis Ababa and Djibouti. The Al Murisi family of Yemen, who were traveling with their five children, endured a similar ordeal.

The Aziz brothers and Al Murisi family were aided by a team of lawyers from the Legal Aid Justice Center (LAJC) in Virginia and the law firm Mayer Brown, which mobilized quickly after learning that the immigrants were denied entry in the US. The lawyers – Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg from LAJC, and Andy Pincus and Paul Hughes from Mayer Brown – obtained an injunction from a federal judge in Virginia staying the executive order before negotiating the boys’ return to the U.S.

“With the critical assistance of Mayer Brown and CrowdJustice, which has helped raise needed funds, the Aziz brothers and Al Murisi family have finally been permitted to arrive in the United States,” said Sandoval-Moshenberg of the LAJC. “While it’s highly gratifying to have played a role in bringing these families together again, we know other families are facing uncertainty and fear as a result of this executive order and encourage them to seek assistance.”

“The executive branch overreached in this unnecessary and unlawful order,” added Hughes of Mayer Brown. “Thanks to the concerted efforts of dozens of determined lawyers and judges throughout the country, however, the rule of law has been vindicated, and two families from Yemen have been made whole.”

Contact:
Tim Wallace
Director of Development
Legal Aid Justice Center
Phone: 434.529.1853 (office) and 773.426.5948 (mobile)

Posted by

Today, the Commonwealth of Virginia announced that it is intervening in the litigation the Legal Aid Justice Center and Mayer Brown LLP have brought on behalf of the Aziz bothers, and others similarly situated, who are lawful permanent residents or immigrant visa holders and who were denied entry to the United States over the past weekend on the basis of the recently-issued Executive Order.

“Virginia’s decision to intervene provides further evidence of the serious constitutional and statutory flaws in the immigration Executive Order,” said Mayer Brown partner Andrew Pincus.

“Virginia’s intervention in our lawsuit confirms the enormous practical repercussions of the Executive Order,” added Mayer Brown partner Paul Hughes.

“Virginia has chosen to intervene in order to protect the rights of all Virginia residents, especially members of its universities,” said Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg of the Legal Aid Justice Center.

For details about the Dulles detainees and to support our efforts in this case, please go here: https://www.crowdjustice.org/case/dullesdetainees/

Resources:

Posted by

PRESS RELEASE: Legal Aid Justice Center and Mayer Brown File Amended Complaint Alleging Detainees Unlawfully Coerced to Sign Forms and Seeking Return Of Aziz Brothers And Similarly Situated Individuals.

In an amended complaint filed on Monday, January 30, lawyers representing two Yemeni brothers contend that their clients were unlawfully coerced to sign I-407 forms, which purported to document “Abandonment of Lawful Permanent Resident Status.” The Yemeni brothers, who were taken into custody after arriving at Dulles Airport hours after President Trump signed his executive order on immigration, were told that refusing to sign the administrative form would leave them unable to enter the US for five years. In fact, as the amended complaint explains, there is no such penalty for refusing to sign the form.

“We believe the agency unlawfully coerced our clients, two Yemeni brothers, and others into signing administrative forms to waive their immigration rights,” said Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, Legal Director of the Immigrant Advocacy Program of the Legal Aid Justice Center, who is co-counsel to the Yemeni brothers with Mayer Brown partners Paul Hughes and Andy Pincus. “Their signatures were not voluntary.”

“This amended complaint reveals a disturbing pattern of conduct by U.S. officials,” added Hughes.

The brothers, Tareq Aqel Mohammed Aziz and Ammar Aqel Muhammad Aziz, arrived at Washington-Dulles International Airport on the morning of Saturday, January 28, 2017, en route to live with their father, a U.S. citizen residing in Flint, Michigan. They were traveling on duly issued United States immigrant visas, and were entitled to lawful permanent resident status in the United States. Upon arrival at Dulles, U.S. officials handcuffed Tareq and Ammar and took them into custody. Officials informed the brothers that, if they did not sign a I-407 form, they would be put into official removal proceedings and ultimately barred from entering the United States for five years. These representations were not correct – US officials had no basis to deny them entry to the United States or to order their removal. Moreover, officials did not provide Tareq and Ammar with access to counsel.

Tareq and Ammar were subsequently placed on a plane to Ethiopia (where their flight to Dulles had originated). At present, they are waiting in Addis Ababa International Airport, hoping to return to the United States. They do not wish to return to their original country of Yemen, which is in the midst of a civil war.

On the evening of Saturday, January 27, 2017, Judge Brinkema of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia issued a temporary restraining order requiring officials at Dulles to provide access to legal counsel for lawful permanent residents detained at Dulles and to forbid further activities to send individuals outside of the United States. The Court issued this order on behalf of both Tareq and Ammar, as well as John Does 1-50, who were similarly situated.

Senator Cory Booker personally delivered a copy of the TRO to airport officials. He has sworn out an affidavit, which is attached to the amended complaint. The amended complaint details concerns about whether Dulles officials properly complied with the requirements of the TRO.

“Legal Aid Justice Center and Mayer Brown are committed to ensuring that Tareq and Ammar are able to exercise their legal right to return to the United States and join their father,” said Andrew Pincus of Mayer Brown.

For details about Dulles detainees and to support this case, please go here: https://www.crowdjustice.org/case/dullesdetainees/

Contact information:

Tim Wallace (Legal Aid Justice Center) 773-426-5948

John Tuerck (Mayer Brown) 312-701-8280

 

Click here for a copy of Amended Complaint 

 

About the Legal Aid Justice Center

The Legal Aid Justice Center (LAJC) fights injustice in the lives of individual Virginians while rooting out exploitative policies and practices that keep people in poverty. LAJC uses impact litigation, community organizing, and policy advocacy to solve urgent problems in areas such as housing, education, civil rights, immigration, healthcare and consumer finance. LAJC’s primary service areas are Charlottesville, Northern Virginia and Richmond/Petersburg, but the effects of their work are felt statewide.

 

About Mayer Brown

Mayer Brown is a global legal services organization advising clients across the Americas, Asia, Europe and the Middle East. Our presence in the world’s leading markets enables us to offer clients access to local market knowledge combined with global reach. We are noted for our commitment to client service and our ability to assist clients with their most complex and demanding legal and business challenges worldwide. We serve many of the world’s largest companies, including a significant proportion of the Fortune 100, FTSE 100, CAC 40, DAX, Hang Seng and Nikkei index companies and more than half of the world’s largest banks. We provide legal services in areas such as: banking and finance; corporate and securities; litigation, arbitration, and other dispute resolution; antitrust and competition; US Supreme Court and appellate; employment and benefits; environmental; financial services regulatory and enforcement; government and global trade; intellectual property; real estate; tax; restructuring, bankruptcy and insolvency; and wealth management.

Mayer Brown comprises legal practices that are separate entities (the “Mayer Brown Practices”). The Mayer Brown Practices are: Mayer Brown LLP and Mayer Brown Europe-Brussels LLP, both limited liability partnerships established in Illinois USA; Mayer Brown International LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated in England and Wales (authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and registered in England and Wales number OC 303359); Mayer Brown, a  SELAS established in France; Mayer Brown Mexico, S.C., a sociedad civil formed under the laws of the State of Durango, Mexico; Mayer Brown JSM, a Hong Kong partnership and its associated legal practices in Asia; and Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with which Mayer Brown is associated. Mayer Brown Consulting (Singapore) Pte. Ltd and its subsidiary, which are affiliated with Mayer Brown, provide customs and trade advisory and consultancy services, not legal services. “Mayer Brown” and the Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of the Mayer Brown Practices in their respective jurisdictions.

Posted by

For Immediate Release

Legal Aid Justice has been informed that U.S. Customs and Border Protection have modified their practices in response to the federal court temporary restraining order.

The Legal Aid Justice Center and Mayer Brown filed suit Saturday on behalf of immigrants detained at Dulles airport as a result of President Trump’s Executive Order banning people from seven countries from entering the U.S.  Our named plaintiffs were two young lawful permanent residents from Yemen who sought to enter the U.S. to be with their U.S. citizen father.  Upon arriving at Dulles, they were detained, denied access to legal counsel, and ultimately placed on a flight to Ethiopia.

We filed suit Saturday, and Judge Brinkema of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia entered a temporary restraining order prohibiting the further removal of such individuals and requiring that LPR persons subject to enhanced screening be allowed access to counsel.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has recently confirmed that it has modified its practices with respect to LPR persons in response to the federal court’s temporary restraining order. We are monitoring CBP’s new practices to ensure rigid adherence and to determine if they comply with the judicial directive.

The Legal Aid Justice Center and Mayer Brown are continuing to advocate on behalf of LPRs entering the United States, as well as those who were denied entry to the United States over the past few days.

The lawyers representing the individuals are Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg of the Legal Aid Justice Center, and Andrew Pincus and Paul Hughes of Mayer Brown LLP.

Contact information:

Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg 434 218-9673

Andrew Pincus 202-320-9125

Paul Hughes 240-441-2240

For details about Dulles detainees and to support this case, please go here: https://www.crowdjustice.org/case/dullesdetainees/

About the Legal Aid Justice Center

The Legal Aid Justice Center (LAJC) fights injustice in the lives of individual Virginians while rooting out exploitative policies and practices that keep people in poverty. LAJC uses impact litigation, community organizing, and policy advocacy to solve urgent problems in areas such as housing, education, civil rights, immigration, healthcare and consumer finance. LAJC’s primary service areas are Charlottesville, Northern Virginia and Richmond/Petersburg, but the effects of their work are felt statewide.

Posted by

Press Release for Immediate Distribution

A federal judge tonight issued a temporary restraining order barring the Department of Homeland Security from removing from the United States 50-60 individuals currently detained at Dulles Airport who are legal permanent residents, but were refused admission into the country because they are citizens of the seven countries identified in President Trump’s executive order, issued yesterday.  DHS had refused to allow the individuals to speak to family members or lawyers and had stated that it planned to send all of them out of the United States.

The judge’s order also requires DHS to permit these individuals to speak to lawyers.

The lawyers representing the individuals are Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg of the Legal Aid Justice Center, and Andrew Pincus and Paul Hughes of Mayer Brown LLP.

Contact information:

Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg 434 218-9673

Andrew Pincus 202-320-9125

Paul Hughes 240-441-2240

For details about Dulles detainees and to support this case, please go here: https://www.crowdjustice.org/case/dullesdetainees/

About the Legal Aid Justice Center

The Legal Aid Justice Center (LAJC) fights injustice in the lives of individual Virginians while rooting out exploitative policies and practices that keep people in poverty. LAJC uses impact litigation, community organizing, and policy advocacy to solve urgent problems in areas such as housing, education, civil rights, immigration, healthcare and consumer finance. LAJC’s primary service areas are Charlottesville, Northern Virginia and Richmond/Petersburg, but the effects of their work are felt statewide.

Temporary Restraining Order

Posted by

The Virginia State Conference of the NAACP has asked the court for leave to file as amicus curiae in opposing DMV Commissioner Holcomb’s motion to dismiss the complaint in Stinnie v. Holcomb. Stinnie v. Holcomb is our lawsuit challenging Virginia’s system of automatically suspending driver’s licenses for unpaid court debt without inquiring into the debtor’s financial circumstances.

Today, the Legal Aid Justice Center filed a Memorandum of Opposition on behalf of the Plaintiffs in response to the Commissioner’s Oct. 3 Motion to Dismiss in Stinnie v. Holcomb. In the Opposition, we argue that (1) legal technicalities do not prevent the court from hearing this lawsuit, and (2) the Commissioner is wrong in his position that the Plaintiffs have not sufficiently alleged that Virginia’s license-for-repayment scheme violates the United States Constitution in the following ways:

  • It violates due process and fundamental fairness by setting up a justice system that punishes those who owe money to the state for sheer inability to pay.
  • It strips Plaintiffs of a constitutionally protected property interest – their driver’s licenses – without the guaranteed safeguards of notice and a hearing.
  • It violates equal protection by treating those who are willing but unable to pay more harshly than those who are willing and able to pay, when the only difference between them is the amount of money they have.
  • Suspending licenses for court debt fails even the most minimum constitutional standards because it is not rationally related to legitimate state interests – indeed, by siphoning away law enforcement resources and preventing debtors from earning a living, it undermines the state’s asserted interests in advancing highway safety and prompting repayment.
  • It subjects Plaintiffs to harsher collection practices than those for civil debtors, in violation of equal protection.

Full Memorandum in Opposition (PDF)

In support of our Opposition, the Virginia State Conference of the NAACP has asked the court for leave to file an amicus brief arguing that Virginia’s driver’s license suspension system for unpaid court debt disproportionately harms black Virginians, violates constitutional rights, and fails even the most basic sense of fairness. In its brief, the NAACP points to data showing “[b]lack people make up only 20% of Virginia’s population, but receive nearly half of the orders of suspension for unpaid court debt,” and “nearly 60% of convictions for driving while suspended wherein court debt was imposed but is ‘past due’ are associated with blacks.” Full Amicus Brief (PDF)

The Legal Aid Justice Center believes that Virginia’s automatic license-for-payment system exposes hundreds of thousands of people to indefinite driver’s license suspension, spiraling debt, and incarceration for driving while suspended, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee that no one shall be punished for their poverty.

News Release: The Virginia State Conference of the NAACP files amicus curiae brief supporting the Plaintiffs in Stinnie v. Holcomb (November 3, 2016)

Additional Resources:
Drive Down the Debt Home Page
U.S. Dept. of Justice Statement of Interest

Posted by

TENANTS ALLEGE DECEPTIVE NOTICES AND HIGH FEES IN CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Charlottesville, Virginia, October 5, 2016 – Five tenants from Richmond, Charlottesville and Harrisonburg have filed a class-action lawsuit in the Charlottesville federal court against Senex Law, P.C., a debt collection firm hired by the plaintiffs’ and many other Virginia landlords. The plaintiffs, represented pro bono by the Legal Aid Justice Center and the law firm of MichieHamlett, allege that Senex uses deceptive practices to collect alleged delinquent rent and other fees from tenants, in violation of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Senex’s practices harm tenants through costly additional charges and for some, lengthy eviction records. The five plaintiffs have brought the case on behalf of a statewide class of tenants who suffered at the hands of Senex’s unlawful practices.

“Senex sells its system as an easy time-saver for landlords, but it’s anything but easy for tenants,” said Bryan Slaughter, MichieHamlett senior counsel. “Once they are behind on rent, the high extra fees charged by Senex make it difficult for our clients to ever get back on track.”

The suit alleges that Senex violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by sending notices purporting to come from landlords, but which were actually drafted and mailed by Senex. The notices do not contain federally-mandated language disclosing Senex’s identity as a debt collector, or describing the procedure that recipients can use to challenge their accuracy. This business practice hurts tenants, costs them substantial money, and puts them at unnecessary and repeated risk of eviction.

Senex then quickly files eviction actions in bulk, generating more costs to tenants and relying on sometimes outdated or inaccurate information from landlords. “This practice goes beyond a simple technical violation of the law. It has real costs to our clients, financial and otherwise, because it can ruin their rental record and their chances to find other housing in the future,” said Kim Rolla, Legal Aid Justice Center’s lead attorney on the case

“It’s been really hard for my family to keep up with all these extra charges,” said Teri Crawford, a named plaintiff in the class-action suit. “I just want stability, to keep a roof over my kids’ heads. I pay my rent. But it seems like every time we’re even a little late, we get hit with a bunch of fees.”

For More Information Contact:
Kim Rolla
Tel: 434-326-8545
Email: kim@justice4all.org

PDF Press Release

Complaint and Attachments:
Class Action Complaint
Exhibits to Complaint

Posted by

Stinnie v. Holcomb:  Plaintiffs’ Statement in Response to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss

Last evening, the Attorney General’s office filed a motion to dismiss in Stinnie v. Holcomb, a lawsuit challenging Virginia’s practice of automatically suspending driver’s licenses for unpaid court debt without inquiring into the debtor’s financial circumstances.

The Plaintiffs are disappointed that the Attorney General’s office would attempt to rely on procedural technicalities to close the courthouse doors to hundreds of thousands of Virginians who just want a chance to present their case to the court. “The state is defending the indefensible,” said Angela Ciolfi, a senior attorney at LAJC. “Since the complaint was filed, the Legal Aid Justice Center has received an outpouring of calls from people who can’t get out of the court debt trap. We’ve heard the strain and desperation in their voices as they describe how they have to choose between paying the court and paying rent, how they can’t find or keep jobs because of unreliable transportation, and how they have had to go to jail just for driving to work.”

Filed on behalf of four individually named plaintiffs, the lawsuit seeks to vindicate the rights of a class consisting of all persons whose Virginia driver’s licenses are suspended due to unpaid court debt and who, at the time of the suspension, were not able to pay due to their financial circumstances. The complaint was filed on July 6, 2016, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia. It asks the federal court to strike down the license-for-repayment law as unconstitutional, order the Defendant DMV Commissioner to stop suspending licenses, and to reinstate the licenses of all drivers who were penalized for inability to pay.

Nearly 1 million Virginia drivers currently have suspended licenses for failure to pay court costs and fines. For many drivers that means giving up their only mode of transportation to work, forcing them to choose between losing their jobs and risking incarceration for driving illegally.

The complaint argues that these practices trap low-income Virginians in a vicious cycle, depriving them of reliable lawful transportation to take children to school, keep medical appointments, care for ill or disabled family members, and “paradoxically, to meet their financial obligations to the courts.” By contrast, the lawsuit notes that wealthier drivers have little difficulty covering court costs and retaining their licenses.

The Plaintiffs are confident in their legal claims and are eager for the case to move forward and provide relief to the hundreds of thousands of people have suffered at the mercy of the license-for-payment system.

Resources:

Plaintiff’s Press Statement on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss

Drive Down the Debt Home Page

 

Posted by

Immigrant Tenants To Protest Offensive Remarks by Major Real Estate Developer
“The lack of affordable housing is a crisis. We need solutions, not stereotypes.”

On Thursday, September 1, 2016, at 11:00am, immigrant tenants from Northern Virginia will join together in protest of offensive and stereotypical comments made by David Hillman, chairman and CEO of Southern Management Corporation. The protest will take place in front of the offices of Southern Management, at 1950 Old Gallows Road, Vienna VA 22182.

In responding to a tragic apartment explosion in Silver Spring that killed seven immigrant tenants including two children, Mr. Hillman said, “They’re not as poor as people think. Immigrants have different needs than native-born Americans. To them, living three to four to a room is not an inconvenience.” (Story)  These comments, by a major real estate developer who manages many predominately immigrant apartment complexes, embody a pernicious stereotype about immigrant families that they are undeserving of just and dignified housing conditions.

“When I heard about what Mr. Hillman said, I felt offended, like he was calling me something less than human,” said Everth Sanchez, an immigrant tenant in Falls Church. “Does he think my children don’t deserve a quiet place to do their homework in the evening? Does he think our community enjoys living with three families to a two-bedroom apartment?”

“The lack of affordable housing is a crisis. We need solutions, not stereotypes,” said Edgar Aranda-Yanoc, Organizing Coordinator of the Legal Aid Justice Center. “Apartments in some of the worst-maintained complexes in Annandale and Falls Church cost around $2000/mo. But the minimum wage in Virginia is still $7.25/hr., and many immigrant workers are paid even less than that. Housing is a right, and it is being denied to our community.”

“The wait list for affordable housing is a mile long, and many immigrants—even legal immigrants with statuses like TPS or DACA—don’t even qualify,” said Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, Legal Director of the Legal Aid Justice Center’s Immigrant Advocacy Program. “Immigrant families, even with two parents working full-time jobs in restaurants or construction, are paying most of their income in rent. If they get sick and miss work, they don’t get paid, they fall behind on rent, and they can find themselves evicted so quickly it leaves their head spinning. I can’t count the number of tenants I’ve represented who paid their base rent in full, but were still placed in eviction proceedings for missing a utility payment or some other junk fee of as little as $250, which balloons to $1000 with all the late fees and legal fees that the landlords add on.”

“Mr. Hillman should keep in mind that the protection of the federal Fair Housing Act extends to all tenants, even immigrants,” said Mary Bauer, Executive Director of the Legal Aid Justice Center. “Such statements can send immigrants the message that they are not wanted here. That can violate the law.” Immigrant tenants and their supporters will be protesting in front of the offices of Southern Management to demand that David Hillman apologize and retract his comments, and instead of peddling in stereotypes, work together with immigrant community leaders to find a solution to the affordable housing crisis for immigrants in Northern Virginia, such as committing to offer a greater percentage of apartments in every development he manages for families below 40 percent of the area median income.

Resources:

Press Release:

Washington Post story referenced in the press release:

 

Posted by

Federal civil rights complaint asserts that RPS discipline policies discriminate against African-American students and students with disabilities.

RICHMOND, VA Two students and the local branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People have filed an anti-discrimination complaint against Richmond Public Schools with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights.

RPS’ discipline policies punish African-American students and students with disabilities more harshly and more frequently than their peers, the complaint asserts. During the 2014-15 school year, African-American students with disabilities were 12.91 times more likely than white students without disabilities to be short-term suspended, according to data provided by the Virginia Department of Education.

The complainants are represented by the Legal Aid Justice Center’s JustChildren program and the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia.

“These disparities cannot be explained by differences in student behavior,” said Rachael Deane, an attorney with the Legal Aid Justice Center. “Rather, there is overwhelming evidence that the school division’s discipline policies are excessively punitive and lack clear standards for application, leading to subjective interpretation and selective enforcement.”

Complainants allege that the student code fails to clearly define misconduct and prescribes overly harsh consequences for relatively minor misbehavior.  “The ACLU is concerned about the wide disparities in the application of student discipline based on race and disability,” said ACLU of Virginia Legal Director Leslie Mehta. “Overly punitive discipline policies damage the learning environment, deny African-American students and students with disabilities of their right to an education and push children into the school-to-prison pipeline.”

During the 2014-15 school year, African-American students made up about 76 percent of the total student population in RPS but were issued 93 percent of short-term suspensions, 98 percent of long-term suspensions, and 97 percent of expulsions. African-American students were 5.69 times more likely than white students to be short-term suspended. Students with disabilities were 2.77 times more likely than students without disabilities to be short-term suspended. Students with disabilities made up 16 percent of the student population but were issued 31 percent of short-term suspensions, 30 percent of long-term suspensions, and 63 percent of expulsions.

“The school division must conduct an unflinching examination of these disparities and adopt strategies to improve school climate and ensure that discipline policies are fair for all students,” said Lynetta Thompson, president of the Richmond NAACP.

The complaint calls for alternative approaches to discipline that would address instances of student misconduct while improving overall school climate. It argues that that Richmond Public Schools could eliminate discrimination and more effectively ensure safe and orderly schools through the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports, social and emotional learning programs and restorative justice processes.

“Suspensions hurt everyone. Students who are removed from school are at a greater risk of academic failure, dropping out, and becoming involved in the justice system,” said Deane. “We hope this complaint leads to a positive transformation within the city schools.”

Resources

Full Complaint
Complaint Appendices
Press Release
Fact Sheet
Office for Civil Rights School Discipline Discrimination Guidance
Office for Civil Rights Resolution Agreement Database

Media Coverage

Virginia School District Disproportionately Punishes Black Students, Complaint Says
(TIME, 8/24/16)

Black students file civil rights complaint against Richmond schools over discipline practices
(Washington Post, 8/24/16)

Students, NAACP file federal civil rights complaint against Richmond Public Schools
(Richmond Times-Dispatch, 8/24/16)

2 students, NAACP file anti-discrimination complaint against Richmond Public Schools
(ABC 8 News, 8/24/16)

2 students, NAACP file anti-discrimination lawsuit against RPS*
(CBS 6, 8/24/16)

Complaint: Black Students Punished More Harshly Than Whites
(ABC News, 8/24/16)

Federal Civil Rights Complaint Filed Against Richmond Public Schools
(NBC 29, 8/24/16)

ACLU: 2 students, Richmond NAACP file anti-discrimination lawsuit against RPS*
(NBC 12, 8/24/16)

Students File Discrimination Complaint Against Richmond Public Schools
(Virginia Public Radio, 8/24/16)

Harsher discipline of Black students spurs lawsuit in Va.*
(The Philadelphia Tribune, 8/26/16)

*The action was an administrative complaint filed with the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, not a lawsuit.