ShareThis Page
Business Briefs

Motel 6 agrees to pay up to $7.6 million to settle claim it helped ICE target Latino guests

| Wednesday, Nov. 7, 2018, 7:24 p.m.
The Motel 6 chain has agreed in a proposed settlement to pay up to $7.6 million to guests who say the company’s employees shared their private information with immigration officials.
The Motel 6 chain has agreed in a proposed settlement to pay up to $7.6 million to guests who say the company’s employees shared their private information with immigration officials.

PHOENIX — The national budget chain Motel 6 has agreed to pay up to $7.6 million to Latino guests who say the company’s employees shared their private information with immigration officials, according to a proposed settlement filed in federal court.

A federal judge must still approve the proposal filed last week in U.S. District Court in Arizona.

The agreement between Motel 6, which is owned by G6 Hospitality in Carrollton, Texas, and guests represented by the Los Angeles-based Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, springs from a class-action lawsuit filed in January.

Calls seeking comment from the hospitality company’s media relations department were not immediately returned Wednesday. Motel 6 in the past has declined to comment on the lawsuit, but has said it takes its guests’ privacy seriously.

Fund president and general counsel Thomas A. Saenz said Wednesday the agreement launches a long process allowing potential class action members to have a say in the case.

Under the proposal, Motel 6 could ultimately pay up to $8.9 million, including reimbursement of legal fees and administrative costs, Saenz said.

“We’re very pleased with the settlement because it will provide for future protections and compensation,” he said.

The civil rights group alleged that Motel 6 discriminated against Latino customers at two locations in Phoenix by sharing their whereabouts and personal information with U.S. immigration agents who later arrested at least seven guests.

Motel 6 said last year that its Phoenix employees would no longer work with immigration authorities after the Phoenix New Times newspaper reported that workers were providing guests’ names to agents.

In a tweet at the time, Motel 6 said: “This was implemented at the local level without the knowledge of senior management.”

The Washington state attorney general also sued the chain in January, saying it had violated a state consumer protection law by providing the private information of thousands of guests to immigration agents without a warrant. The attorney general’s office in that state began investigating after news reports about the Phoenix case.

The Phoenix lawsuit was filed on behalf of eight unnamed Latinos who stayed at two Motel 6 locations in the city in June and July 2017. All but one was arrested.

ICE agents visited some guests at their rooms after they showed Motel 6 employees their passports, driver’s licenses or identification cards issued by the Mexican government, according to the lawsuit.

It said one woman was deported from the United States and a man spent 30 days in a detention center until he could raise a $7,500 bond.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement wasn’t targeted in the lawsuit, and the agency in the past has declined to comment on the legal action.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me