(NLG) Although the case originally stated two different groups of plaintiffs, various religious organizations involved in the Sanctuary movement and Central American refugees, after changes were made to criminal laws formerly used to prosecute these religious organizations, the focus of the suit was centered more specifically to claims of discrimination against Central American refugees in asylum seeking processes.
After five years, the government settled the case, granting temporary protected status for many Salvadoran and Guatemalan immigrants and providing them with among other things, de novo asylum interviews, stays from deportation and work authorization.
Both countries, experiencing stark poverty and political repression, similarly experienced the use of militarily trained “death squads”, forced disappearances, the formation of guerrilla resistance movements, and massacres such as El Mozote in El Salvador and the genocide of indigenous Mayans in Guatemala.
Other instances also involved excessive force, providing false information, and threatening detainees who refused to sign with punishment.
[9] Ultimately, the plaintiffs were able to secure de novo adjudication for many Guatemalan and Salvadoran migrants, who while they waited for new interviews, were also granted a stay from deportation and work authorization.
Those who did not meet the period of arrival or had committed an aggravated felony however, were barred from receiving asylum and settlement benefits.
Most applicants would be protected from deportation with exception of individuals who had committed a crime of moral turpitude, which carried a sentence of at least 6 months, posed a national security risk, or was deemed a threat to public safety.