Council reports two closed‑session amicus votes to support DACA and TPS litigants
May 13, 2026 | San Diego City, San Diego County, California
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
During the March 6 meeting’s closed session, the council voted to join as amicus in two federal immigration cases, the city attorney reported in open session.
Assistant City Attorney Jean Jordan read the closed‑session actions into the public record: the council voted 5–0 to join litigation in Texas v. United States (Southern District of Texas, case number 118cv00068) as an amicus supporting the federal government’s defense of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. The council also voted 5–0 to join in Ramos v. Mayorkas (Ninth Circuit case number 18‑16981) as an amicus supporting plaintiffs seeking restoration of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for certain countries. Jordan reported those motions passed 5–0 and listed members who were absent for the votes as read into the record.
The city attorney emphasized that the council’s closed‑session votes were recorded in the meeting’s public readout. No additional details on briefing text or filing timelines were presented in open session.
Assistant City Attorney Jean Jordan read the closed‑session actions into the public record: the council voted 5–0 to join litigation in Texas v. United States (Southern District of Texas, case number 118cv00068) as an amicus supporting the federal government’s defense of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. The council also voted 5–0 to join in Ramos v. Mayorkas (Ninth Circuit case number 18‑16981) as an amicus supporting plaintiffs seeking restoration of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for certain countries. Jordan reported those motions passed 5–0 and listed members who were absent for the votes as read into the record.
The city attorney emphasized that the council’s closed‑session votes were recorded in the meeting’s public readout. No additional details on briefing text or filing timelines were presented in open session.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
