This morning more than 70 immigrants and immigrant supporters showed up outside the federal building in Hartford to show support for the Danbury 11 and demand that all charges against these men be dropped. The picket stretched along the sidewalk of the Federal building as supporters for immigrant rights chanted and demanded justice for immigrants everywhere.
It is my pleasure to announce that our voices did not go unheard. The Danbury 11 case has now been continued and they now have a second hearing assigned for September 17. Although the final decision was not made today, this day proves to be essential for their case. Their lawyers attest that lesser-known defendants would have been deported on the spot. Now ICE is left to decide whether it will defend its illegal entrapment of the day laborers.
The Danbury 11 have become more than just a group of undocumented immigrants who were picked up by ICE. The decision made today proves that the Danbury 11 have a case. The decision made today proves that immigrants have a right to a proper defense. And most of all, it proves that immigrants have a right to be heard!
The demonstrations surrounding this case is getting more media attention. Lets just say that this case, and the possible lawsuit, is FAR from over.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
Undercurrent gives the details...
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
