Thread: Two legal experts helping Hazleton redraft law

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?news ... 5154&rfi=6


Alipac's Hazelton, PA Focus Campaign Page

http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=F ... 320#207320

08/29/2006
Two legal experts helping Hazleton redraft law Revisions of ordinance on illegal immigration set for Sept. 12 session
BY WADE MALCOLM
STAFF WRITER


Hoping to eliminate any legally tenuous passages, Hazleton will redraft its controversial illegal immigration ordinance — again.

The ordinance aiming to punish those who rent to or employ illegal immigrants and make English the city’s official language has undergone several changes since Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta first proposed the plan in June.

But these changes could be more significant compared to previous amendments.

Two nationally known immigration lawyers, now working for the city, will craft a new ordinance scheduled for a first reading Sept. 12. It would go into effect after a second and third reading Oct. 11, according to City Solicitor Christopher Slusser.

“We’ve always said this is a work in progress,” said Barletta, who has gained national attention promoting and standing behind the ordinance. “We’ll do whatever we have to do to get the most enforceable ordinance that will stand up to legal scrutiny.”

The goal of redrafting the ordinance, Barletta said, is to make it more defensible in court. A federal lawsuit has been filed against the city by advocacy groups and attorneys arguing the ordinance violates federal immigration and civil rights laws.

The overall intent of the new ordinance, however, will be the same, according to Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) attorney Michael Hethmon, who is drafting Hazleton’s ordinance along with immigration lawyer Kris Kobach. But differences in language between the two are substantial.

The ordinance passed 4-1 by city council on first reading Aug. 15 is three pages. FAIR provided The Citizens’ Voice with a copy of a “sample” illegal immigration ordinance, which the new ordinance is expected to closely resemble. It is seven pages.

“There are some things in the ordinance that are improperly worded (in the old ordinance),” Hethmon said. “The technical language can be improved.”

With phrases like “unless ... expressly permitted by federal law,” the sample ordinance frequently refers to how the city would conform to federal immigration laws in enforcing its ordinance.

The lawsuit also contends the ordinance has already and will continue to promote discrimination and violates civil rights laws. Twice, the sample ordinance states that any accusation made against an individual “solely or primarily on the basis of national origin, ethnicity or race shall be deemed invalid and shall not be enforced.”

Barletta and the city’s legal team believe an ordinance of this kind is such a progressive step for local government, according to Hethmon, that the constant tweaking is justifiable and to be expected. Several communities in Eastern Pennsylvania and throughout the country have adopted or considered illegal immigration ordinances nearly identical to Hazleton’s.

“Hazleton is going to be the showdown case,” Hethmon said. “This is going to be a test case on a major issue in this country.”

Despite the high stakes, the city with a $7 million budget only recently assembled a team of immigration experts to square off against the powerful lineup of lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union and the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund.

FAIR and the Mountain States Legal Fund are offering their services pro bono, but if the city loses the lawsuit, it could face plaintiff’s legal fees in excesses of $500,000. The city is looking into whether its insurance policies might cover any losses incurred from the lawsuit, according to city Administrator Samuel Monticello.

Prior to the ordinance’s initial passage in July, the city never commissioned a study to investigate the feasibility of enforcing and defending the ordinance. But city officials said the ordinance’s publicity has afforded opportunity that wasn’t available before.

“Would we have liked to have had the help of Kris (Kobach) and FAIR earlier? Sure,” Slusser said. “But we’re happy we’ve been able to consult with them now.”

Attorneys from the groups suing the city viewed changes to the ordinance as an admission of the its questionable constitutionality.

“I’m not surprised by (the change),” said Cesar Perales, president of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, one of the groups named in filing the suit. “I think it was flawed in its premise, flawed in its language and flawed in its implementation. Our argument remains the same: It is the national government that has responsibility for immigration.”

Saying they do not want to reveal their legal strategy, lawyers suing the city would not comment on whether the lawsuit would be amended because of the changes.

wmalcolm@citizensvoice.com

I'm sure hoping the support they are getting from FAIR and their other supporters win over the ACLU and the other groups filing this suit against Hazlton.

http://www.standardspeaker.com/index.ph ... 1&Itemid=2

IIRA to be revised again
Wednesday, 30 August 2006
By L.A. TARONE
tarone@standardspeaker.com
There will be more revisions in Hazleton’s Illegal Immigration Relief Act. When city council meets next week, it will have another draft of IIRA to consider. The changes between it and the one council adopted on first reading last meeting have been written by attorney Michael Hethmon, who is affiliated with the Federal for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).

The changes are technical in nature and do not change the measure’s main provisions. English will still be the city’s official language; landlords will still be fined $1,000 per day per illegal to whom they rent; and businesses will still lose their business privilege license and any and/or all contracts with the city if they are caught hiring anyone in the country illegally – five years for a first offense, 10 years for a second.

The IIRA, already in place, has been challenged in federal court by a consortium of lawyers from the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, the American Civil Liberties Union and several private lawyers.

While the lawyers said they’re confident in getting the ordinance thrown out, Mayor Lou Barletta and Solicitor Chris Slusser have said they’re equally confident of winning.

Slusser said the changes are intended to make defense of the bill “easier” in federal court.

Many observers feel the suit is likely to work its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, as there are a host of cities nationwide looking at adopting similar ordinances.

“We want to make sure the ordinance will stand up and be fair to everyone,” Barletta said. “Our goal is to make it even more defensible, rid the city of illegal aliens and protect legal American workers.”
Slusser said the revisions are in progress and have not yet been finished. When they are, he said, the substance will not have changed, but some of the wording will have been tightened.

“Subject matter has not changed,” Slusser said. “It will more clearly define what constitutes a violation. The language has been altered to mirror language that is already in place in federal immigration law.”
The term “harboring” illegals will be included, as Slusser said federal court has already recognized that language.

“Our intent is to take away every argument our critics are intending to pursue,” Slusser added. “So it will center around harboring and employing illegal aliens.”

Critics have taken the number of revisions (this is the third) as tacit admission the measure, as created, is unconstitutional. Slusser said that’s not the case.

“We’ve been criticized about making numerous revisions,” Slusser said. “The critics are saying, ‘aha! They’re conceding it’s invalid.’ And that’s not the case at all. But after discussions with FAIR, we want to make sure this ordinance is as clear and defensible as possible.”

Barletta referred to it as a “work in progress,” and Slusser noted that since this is the first ordinance of its type in the country, “tweaking” of it is to be expected.

“When it’s finished, we’re bring (Hethmon) in to discuss it,” Barletta said.
That is expected late this week or early next week, as council meets next Thursday and is expected to act on the revision.

In addition to FAIR, the city is also receiving legal assistance in the suit from attorney Kris Kobach, a former aide to former Attorney General John Ashcroft mainly on immigration issues, and the Mountain States Legal Foundation, headed by former Reagan administration official William Perry Pendley.

FAIR is the longest-running immigration interest group in the country. Founded by Dan Stein in 1979, the group has long called for significant changes in US immigration law, including a reduction in legal immigration to about 300,000 annually.

The “comprehensive immigration package” passed by the U.S. Senate – and stalled amidst raging controversy in the House – set legal immigration levels at 66 million over 20 years; about 3,300,000 annually.