Irvine council authorizes amicus brief in federal immigration detention case; filing paused after Supreme Court action

The Irvine City Council voted to authorize filing an amicus brief supporting plaintiffs challenging warrantless immigration detentions, but the city attorney told the council the actual filing is paused after a U.S. Supreme Court decision.

The council authorized the amicus brief 5-2 during a special meeting, City Attorney Jeff Melching said. Melching told the council that the plaintiffs' preliminary-injunction briefing in the Ninth Circuit was delayed after the Supreme Court issued a ruling, and the plaintiffs have said they may not file at all. “If they don't file a brief, we can't file a brief,” Melching said. The city said that, if the plaintiffs do file, Irvine will file no later than Sept. 22, 2025.

Why it matters: The brief would have joined a federal appeal over warrantless immigration operations that residents and speakers said are causing fear in immigrant communities in Southern California. Supporters urged the council to act to protect residents, while at least one caller said immigration enforcement is federal policy and the city should not intervene.

What the council heard: During public comment before the closed-session action, longtime Irvine resident Susan Sayer said the detentions are “tearing apart families” and called on the council to participate in the lawsuit. UCI student Davis Garcia described personal connections to people impacted by immigration enforcement and urged the council to “stand for humanity.” A caller identified as Dee Fox, dialing in by phone, told the council that immigration enforcement is federal policy and said the city should not involve itself.

What the city reported: City staff and the city attorney told the council that the subject of Item 1.1 was participation as amicus in Perdomo v. Nome, the Central District action about federal immigration detention practices. Melching summarized the council’s 5-2 authorization to support the plaintiffs’ preliminary-injunction briefing and said the timing for filing is now controlled by events in the federal courts.

Background and next steps: The council's authorization does not itself file the brief; the city attorney said the brief will be filed only if and when the plaintiffs submit their brief to the Ninth Circuit. The city attorney said the plaintiffs' brief—originally due before the Supreme Court action—may be filed by Sept. 22, 2025. If plaintiffs do not file, Irvine will not file an amicus brief, Melching said.

Speakers and attribution: Quotes in this report come from speakers recorded in the meeting transcript: Susan Sayer (Irvine resident), Davis Garcia (UCI student), Dee Fox (telephone commenter), and City Attorney Jeff Melching.

Ending: With the federal litigation and a recent Supreme Court decision affecting the briefing schedule, the council’s support is now contingent on what the plaintiffs do in the appeals court. The council will monitor filings and staff said it will file only if the plaintiffs proceed.