USCA Case #21-5028 Document #1902942 Filed: 06/21/2021 Page 1 of 7
`
`
`ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED
`
`No. 21-5028
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
`
`WASHINGTON ALLIANCE OF TECHNOLOGY WORKERS,
`Appellant,
`v .
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
`HOMELAND SECURITY, et al.,
`Appellees.
`
`On Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
`(No. 1:16-cv-1170) (Hon. Reggie B. Walton, District Judge)
`
`Motion of the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration For
`Leave to File Brief Amicus Curiae In Support of Appellees and Intervenors
`
`
`
`Ishan K. Bhabha
`Jenner & Block LLP
`1099 New York Avenue, N.W.
`Suite 900
`Washington, DC 20001
`(202) 637-6327
`IBhabha@jenner.com
`Counsel for Amicus
`
`
`
`
`
`
`June 21, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED
`
`No. 21-5028
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
`
`WASHINGTON ALLIANCE OF TECHNOLOGY WORKERS,
`Appellant,
`v .
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
`HOMELAND SECURITY, et al.,
`Appellees.
`
`On Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
`(No. 1:16-cv-1170) (Hon. Reggie B. Walton, District Judge)
`
`Motion of the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration For
`Leave to File Brief Amicus Curiae In Support of Appellees and Intervenors
`
`
`
`Ishan K. Bhabha
`Jenner & Block LLP
`1099 New York Avenue, N.W.
`Suite 900
`Washington, DC 20001
`(202) 637-6327
`IBhabha@jenner.com
`Counsel for Amicus
`
`
`
`
`
`
`June 21, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`USCA Case #21-5028 Document #1902942 Filed: 06/21/2021 Page 2 of 7
`
`
`
`Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 29(a) and D.C. Circuit Rule
`
`29(b), the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration (“Presidents’
`
`Alliance” or “Alliance”) respectfully moves the Court for leave to file a brief as
`
`amicus curiae in support of Appellees United States Department of Homeland
`
`Security, Citizenship and Immigration Services, and Immigrations and Customs
`
`Enforcement and Intervenors National Association of Manufacturers, Chamber of
`
`Commerce of the United States of America, and Information Technology Industry
`
`Council in the above-captioned matter. In support of this Motion, Presidents’
`
`Alliance states as follows:
`
`1.
`
`Presidents’ Alliance
`
`is a nonprofit, non-partisan membership
`
`organization comprised of American college and university leaders dedicated to
`
`increasing public understanding of how immigration policies and practices affect
`
`students, campuses and communities. Alliance’s member institutions include large
`
`public universities, private research universities, liberal arts colleges, and more.
`
`These member institutions are located in urban centers and rural areas, and
`
`throughout states that span the political spectrum. Collectively, Alliance’s
`
`membership represents a large portion of the U.S. academic community, including
`
`a significant number of international students who participate in optional practical
`
`training (OPT), the longstanding government program challenged in this action.
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`USCA Case #21-5028 Document #1902942 Filed: 06/21/2021 Page 3 of 7
`
`
`2.
`
`Presidents’ Alliance sought consent from all parties to participate as
`
`amicus curiae in this appeal through the filing of a separate amicus brief.
`
`3.
`
` Counsel for Appellees and Intervenors have each consented to
`
`Presidents’ Alliance’s participation as amicus curiae in this appeal.
`
`4. When asked for consent, counsel for Appellant Washington Alliance of
`
`Technology Workers responded that it consented only to the filing of a single amicus
`
`brief by all prospective amici. In light of the other amicus briefs being filed in
`
`support of Appellees and Intervenors, Appellant did not consent to the filing of this
`
`brief.
`
`5.
`
`Counsel for Presidents’ Alliance has conferred with counsel for
`
`American Immigration Council (“AIC”) regarding the scope of the amicus brief
`
`noticed on June 4, 2021. Counsel have confirmed that the substance of the proposed
`
`briefs are not duplicative.
`
`6.
`
`Filing a single amicus brief with other amici would be impracticable
`
`and detract from the distinct perspective Presidents’ Alliance moves to present to the
`
`Court. As Judge Walton recognized below, the perspective of Alliance’s member
`
`institutions “present[s] ideas, arguments, theories, insights, facts[,] or data that are
`
`not . . . found in the parties’ briefs.” Wash. All. of Tech. Workers v. U.S. Dep’t of
`
`Homeland Security., No. 16-cv-1170, 2021 WL 329847, at *1 n.2 (D.D.C. Jan. 28,
`
`2021) (quoting N. Mariana Islands v. United States, No. 08-CV-1572, 2009 WL
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`USCA Case #21-5028 Document #1902942 Filed: 06/21/2021 Page 4 of 7
`
`
`596986, at *1 (D.D.C. Mar. 6, 2009)). This is because without OPT, the education
`
`that international students will receive in the United States will be less robust, and
`
`the ability of American colleges and universities to attract and educate the best and
`
`brightest from around the world will diminish. The perspective of these institutions
`
`will demonstrate to the Court that international students are an integral part of the
`
`fabric of U.S. higher education. Moreover, it will demonstrate that serious
`
`consequences will result—both for American colleges and universities, and for the
`
`national economy—if Appellant prevails in this appeal.
`
`7.
`
`An amicus brief is timely if filed “no later than 7 days after the principal
`
`brief of the party being supported is filed.” Fed. R. App. P. 29(a)(6). Appellees and
`
`Intervenors filed their briefs on Friday, June 11, 2021. This Court was closed on
`
`Friday, June 18, 2021 in observance of the Juneteenth National Independence Day
`
`federal holiday. Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 26 and D.C. Cir. R. 45(b), Presidents’
`
`Alliance’s proposed brief, attached to this Motion as Exhibit A, is therefore timely.
`
`8.
`
`No party or counsel for a party authored the brief in whole or in part,
`
`and no party, counsel for a party, or person other than amicus curiae, its members,
`
`or their counsel made any monetary contribution intended to fund the preparation or
`
`submission of this brief.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`USCA Case #21-5028 Document #1902942 Filed: 06/21/2021 Page 5 of 7
`
`
`WHEREFORE, leave to file the attached amicus curiae brief should be
`
`granted.
`
`
`Respectfully submitted:
`
`June 21, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Ishan K. Bhabha
`Ishan K. Bhabha
`JENNER & BLOCK LLP
`1099 New York Avenue NW, Suite 900
`Washington, DC 20001
`Telephone: (202) 639-6000
`IBhabha@jenner.com
`
`
`Counsel for Presidents’ Alliance on
`Higher Education and Immigration
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`USCA Case #21-5028 Document #1902942 Filed: 06/21/2021 Page 6 of 7
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on June 21, 2021, I caused the foregoing to be
`
`electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system, which
`
`will provide electronic notice and an electronic link to this document to all attorneys
`
`of record.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By: /s/ Ishan K. Bhabha
`Ishan K. Bhabha
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`USCA Case #21-5028 Document #1902942 Filed: 06/21/2021 Page 7 of 7
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
`
`I hereby certify that the foregoing motion complies with the type-volume
`
`limitation of Fed. R. App. P. 27 because it contains 664 words. This motion also
`
`complies with the typeface and the type-style requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 27
`
`because this brief has been prepared in a proportionally spaced typeface using Word
`
`14-point Times New Roman typeface.
`
`
`
`By:
`
`
`/s/ Ishan K. Bhabha
`Ishan K. Bhabha
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`June 21, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
