Legal Opinion
Maria Muniz-Muniz v. United States Border Patrol
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided August 24, 2017No. 16-3400PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judge.
The Plaintiffs in this case — now only two organizations that represent migrant farm-workers — claim that the United States Border Patrol allows agents at its San-dusky Bay, Ohio station to target persons of Hispanic appearance for questioning. After a bench trial, the district court found that the Plaintiffs had not proved their claim. We affirm.
I
The Border Patrol’s mission includes enforcing the Nation’s immigration laws, as well as preventing terrorism and combat-ting border-related crimes like human smuggling and sex trafficking. The agency’s Sandusky Bay…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Washington v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Joe D'Ambrosio v. Carmen MarinoCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2014
- Feliciano v. City of ClevelandCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1993
- United States v. Cortez AveryCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1997
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- R. Alexander Acosta v. Cathedral BuffetCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2018
- Jackson v. City of ClevelandDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2022
- R. Alexander Acosta v. Cathedral BuffetCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2018
- Ronald Ogle v. Sevier Cnty. Reg'l Planning Comm'nCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2020