Thread: Federal judge blocks Hazleton immigrant ban

http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centreda ... 895933.htm

By MICHAEL RUBINKAM

Associated Press Writer

ALLENTOWN, Pa. (AP) -- A federal judge on Tuesday blocked the city of Hazleton from enforcing a pair of ordinances targeting illegal immigrants, just hours before the measures were to go into effect.

The measures, approved by City Council last month, would have imposed fines on landlords who rent to illegal immigrants and denied business permits to companies that give them jobs. They also would have required tenants to register with City Hall and pay for a rental permit.

U.S. District Judge James Munley ruled that landlords, tenants and businesses that cater to Hispanics faced "irreparable harm" from the laws and issued a temporary restraining order blocking their enforcement.

"We find it in the public interest to protect residents access to homes, education, jobs and businesses," he wrote in a 13-page opinion.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/10/31/immig ... index.html

PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania (Reuters) -- A federal judge Tuesday temporarily barred Hazleton, Pennsylvania, from implementing a law designed to prevent illegal immigrants from living in the town.

Judge James Munley of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania issued a temporary restraining order against Hazleton City Council, preventing it from enforcing its Illegal Immigration Relief Act Ordinance.

The measure has become a model for other U.S. towns that blame illegal immigrants for a range of social problems.

The law, which had been scheduled to take effect Wednesday, would fine landlords found to be renting space to illegal aliens, close down businesses that hire them, and allow legal employees to sue the businesses for employment lost during such a shutdown. A related law also establishes English as the town's official language.

The restraining order is valid until November 14.

In a 13-page opinion, Munley said immigrants risked "irreparable injury" by being evicted from their apartments if the law is enforced. He also said he was not convinced by the city council's argument that illegal immigration increases crime and overburdens social services.

"Defendant offers only vague generalizations about the crime allegedly caused by illegal immigrants but has nothing concrete to back up these claims," Munley wrote.

He added that since the plaintiffs -- representing the town's Hispanic community -- claim the law affects constitutionally protected rights, it is in the public interest to delay enforcement of the ordinance until a court can consider its constitutional implications.

About a third of Hazleton's 31,000 residents are immigrants from Central America. According to local civil rights activists, about a quarter of the town's immigrant population is in the United States illegally.

The law, passed by the city council in July and revised in September, is seen as a template for similar laws passed by 10 other towns around the country, according to the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, one of the groups that has joined in a lawsuit challenging the measure.

Thirty-two towns are considering similar measures.

"We find it in the public interest to protect residents access to homes, education, jobs and businesses," he wrote in a 13-page opinion.

Here we go again. Wonder if it mentions rights of citizens anywhere in his opinion?

U.S. District Judge James Munley ruled that landlords, tenants and businesses that cater to Hispanics faced "irreparable harm" from the laws and issued a temporary restraining order blocking their enforcement.

They can cater to all the Hispanics they want so long as they are LEGAL. Who caters to the Chinese, the Russians, the Italian and so on? Who said it had anything to do with any particular group? What is wrong with this judge? The law has to do with illegal aliens not legal Citiznes!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15504113/

ALLENTOWN, Pa. - A federal judge on Tuesday blocked the city of Hazleton from enforcing a pair of ordinances targeting illegal immigrants, just hours before the measures were to go into effect.

The measures, approved by the City Council last month, would have imposed fines on landlords who rent to illegal immigrants and denied business permits to companies that give them jobs. They also would have required tenants to register with City Hall and pay for a rental permit.

U.S. District Judge James Munley ruled that landlords, tenants and businesses that cater to Hispanics faced "irreparable harm" from the laws and issued a temporary restraining order blocking their enforcement.

"We find it in the public interest to protect residents’ access to homes, education, jobs and businesses," he wrote in a 13-page opinion.

Hispanic groups and the ACLU sued Hazleton on Monday, contending the laws violate the Constitution because they trample on the federal government's exclusive power to regulate immigration.

Mayor Lou Barletta, who spearheaded the law, has argued that illegal immigrants have brought an increase in drugs, crime and gangs to the city. The city's lawyers on Tuesday cited a 10 percent increase in crime between 2004 and 2005 as a reason why the ordinances should be enforced.

Munley, however, wrote that the city "offers only vague generalizations about the crime allegedly caused by illegal immigrants, but has nothing concrete to back up these claims."

Hazleton's crackdown, which was announced in June, has spurred other towns to pass similar laws. Municipal officials view the Hazleton lawsuit and a similar one in Riverside, N.J., as test cases.

Witold J. Walczak, legal director of the ACLU of Pennsylvania, hailed Tuesday's decision as an important victory.

"I think what's important is the judge recognized that this ordinance has the potential to cause real harm by costing people their jobs, their houses and requiring children to leave schools," he said.

The judge's restraining order expires Nov. 14. He indicated that he will schedule a hearing on the ACLU's motion for a temporary injunction.

Barletta has said he is convinced the courts will ultimately uphold the law.

Now I'm very confused.......please explain this to me.

I was under the impression/belief that the American judicial system was put into place for the PROTECTION of AMERICAN CITIZENS and the
protection of the Constitution.

Is this judge saying that it's more important to protect Illegal Aliens
and their property than it is to protect Legal American property?

Discussion at MSNBC

http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/threa ... dID=115202

"Witold J. Walczak, legal director of the ACLU of Pennsylvania, hailed Tuesday's decision as an important victory."

You can bet the UCLU is getting some fat donations at this time

We need to know it this is a LIBERAL activists judge, and RUSH LIMBO BETTER BRING THIS UP WITH TONS OF PHONE CALLS!! GRRRRRRRRRRRR

EXPECTED THIS, THIS WILL GO TO SUPREME COURT, THIS SHOULD BE FRONT AND CENTER FOR ALL TALK RADIO FOR A WEEK!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Perhaps the fact that this judge, and too many other Federal judges, was appointed by President Clinton has something to do with this opinion.

UB