Thread: Hazleton agrees to delay immigrant crackdown law

http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/ ... 06281.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hazleton agrees to delay immigrant crackdown law
By: MICHAEL RUBINKAM (Fri, Sep/01/2006)


ALLENTOWN, Pa. - The city of Hazleton on Friday agreed to delay enforcing a law that targets illegal immigrants, giving Hispanic activists and the ACLU a temporary victory in their quest to have the crackdown declared unconstitutional.

Hazleton, a city of about 31,000 residents, approved one of the toughest laws of its kind in the United States on July 13, imposing $1,000 fines on landlords who rent to illegal immigrants, denying business permits to companies that give them jobs and making English the city's official language.

The American Civil Liberties Union and Hispanic groups sued to overturn the law on Aug. 15, contending that the Constitution gives the federal government exclusive power to regulate immigration and that the city's ordinance is discriminatory and unworkable. They believe the law will foster discrimination against Hispanics who came to the U.S. legally.

On Friday, Hazleton said it wouldn't enforce the measure. Enforcement was to begin Sept. 11. The city is working on a replacement ordinance that it says will better stand up in court.

In return, the plaintiffs agreed not to seek an injunction against the city. U.S. District Judge James Munley, who is overseeing the lawsuit, approved the agreement.

"Hopefully, the legal protection we now have will give some comfort to the local immigrant community and calm their fears," said Witold J. Walczak, legal director of the ACLU of Pennsylvania.

Republican Mayor Lou Barletta, who has championed the law, did not immediately return a call for comment Friday.

Under the agreement, Hazleton must give the plaintiffs at least 20 days' notice before it begins enforcing either the ordinance passed in July or its replacement - enough time for the ACLU to head back into court to try to stop it.

The ACLU, the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, and other groups filed the lawsuit on behalf of 11 Hazleton residents and business owners and three nonprofit groups. Among the plaintiffs are landlords who say they lost tenants and a Mexican immigrant who says her grocery store and restaurant have fallen on hard times since the ordinance was passed.

It is not clear how many illegal immigrants live in Hazleton, about 80 miles northwest of Philadelphia, but the city's Hispanic population has soared in recent years. Barletta proposed the ordinance after two illegal immigrants were charged with shooting and killing a man. He has said the new law has already spurred many illegal immigrants to leave the city.

Frustrated by inaction in Washington and inspired by the Hazleton crackdown, many local governments have passed their own measures to restrict or punish illegal immigrants and those who do business with them.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article's URL:

http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/ ... 06281.html

Oh no! We need to get the donations and support calls going into Hazelton fast! This is a setback! Let's hope they have a good plan to pull through with this.

W

I think Mayor Barletta needs to come out with an official statement explaining this immediately, especially after all his talk of not backing down. Before losing my cool over this, I'll await his official statement regarding this update.

This might not be a bad thing if Hazleton uses this delay to really make sure the ordinance is crafted in a way that will really stand up in court. It's better to take a little more time and make sure everything is well done.

One thing I keep wondering though: why in the heck are the Puerto Ricans in on this? What dog do they have in the hunt? Aren't they US citizens? I mean, they are not illegals--why are they even getting involved in this? Wouldn't you think that other LEGAL US citizens would want the immigration laws enforced?

OK--they say immigration enforcement is up to the feds. FINE! But, what are we to do when the federal government WON'T ENFORCE THE LAW!! This is so frustrating!!

Story on Lou Dobbs says he is holding off, but hiring a legal team!

My God, this is so out of control!

I saw this on Dobbs too. While a set back Barletta was upbeat and said they were using this time to not only bring it back but bring it back stronger. We all need to have the same attitude. Whatever it takes! They are going to throw up whatever is available to them to get in our way. It won't be a straight line from A-Z but we will win!

Also mentioned on Lou Dobbs, over $90,000.00 has been donated to Hazletons legal fund.

We will win. No bunch of third world invaders is any match for Americans. Take a deep breath, relax then go put your Flag out,
have a BBQ and some adult beverage (no Millers) and thank God
that your a citizen of the greatest country in the world.

Don't forget come back Tuesday and kick some butt.
have a great Labor day weekend.

We are fighting government officials that won't do their jobs, as well as the ACLU that plans to stick their foot in every aspect of our lives.

When we find a government official that does the will of his citizens, he gets kicked in the teeth by illegals using OUR laws to fight us.

We need to start thinking about law suits, in every shape and form!

I'm not really surprised since there were a few articles mentioning they were redrafting the ordinance. How can you enforce a law under those circumstances.

http://www.standardspeaker.com/index.ph ... 5&Itemid=2

Hazleton to revise illegals law
Saturday, 02 September 2006
By L.A. TARONE
A common legal procedure has turned into a war of words between opponents of Hazleton’s Illegal Immigration Relief Act and the city.

Friday, the city answered the lawsuit filed against it over IIRA in Federal Court in Scranton. By law it had to file a legal response to the suit within 20 days.

The city’s response said it would not enforce the ordinance enacted July 13 because it was being revised. It said, however, it would enforce the revised ordinance once it had passed council on second and third readings.

But that language was taken by the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education fund as a victory.

Friday afternoon, it sent a press release to media outlets across the country titled, “On Eve of Federal Court Hearing, City of Hazleton Agrees to Withdraw Harsh Anti-Immigrant Law.”

Mayor Lou Barletta called the press release a “tactic” by a group of plaintiffs who are “scared” of the eventual outcome of the legal challenge to IIRA.

“Just as Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund as well as other civil rights groups were about to ask Federal District Court Judge James M. Munley in Scranton, Pennsylvania to stop the City of Hazelton (sic) from implementing it harsh anti-immigrant ordinance, the City agreed today to withdraw it,” the release read. “In exchange, the residents, represented by the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, American Civil Liberties Union, the Community Justice Project, the law firm of Cozen O’Connor and local attorneys George Barron, David Vaida, and Barry Dyller, agreed to not seek an injunction against Hazelton (sic).”

An injunction is a legal request that a court stop the implementation of a law until legal questions over the crux of the law are answered by that same court. Opponents of IIRA had planned to file an injunction against the ordinance.

The opponents’ decision not to seek an injunction is not the same as dropping the suit against the ordinance.

Since the city agreed not to enforce the ordinance already enacted, an injunction would be unnecessary. But if the city intends to enforce the amended version after it is adopted, opponents would be expected to file for an injunction to block enforcement of that.

“As we have said from the beginning, the ordinance was flawed in its premise and in its language. Its implementation would also be flawed. Hazleton has no business in regulating immigration” the release quoted Cesar Perales, president and general counsel of PRLDEF, as saying. “The ordinance has only succeeded in creating a divisive atmosphere in the community.”

Perales is also quoted as saying PRLDEF is ready to challenge any similar law the city would pass and is already challenging copycat ordinances enacted by about 30 cities and towns nationwide.

“This agreement should signal to those other copycat localities that the notorious Hazelton ordinance is indefensible and had better be revoked,” the releases quote Perales as saying.

But Friday afternoon, Barletta’s office also issued a release in response to PRLDEF’s.

“The City of Hazleton’s primary focus remains on protecting the interests and safety of U.S. citizens and legal immigrants who reside in the city,” it read. “The revised ordinance, which we will implement in Hazleton, does not reflect a change in the commitment of the city’s leadership to halt the influx of illegal immigrants. Rather, the revisions reflect our commitment to protect the legal residents of this city within the framework of the law.”
Friday, Barletta was both angry and dismissive of the PRLDEF’s press release.

“What you’re seeing is a tactic on the part of people who are very concerned about the outcome of this legal case,” Barletta said. “We have assembled one of the best legal teams in the country and (opponents) are worried about what will happen when the case is heard.”

Barletta said the planned revisions to the ordinance will make it “even stronger and more defensible.

“What we did Friday was simply procedural,” Barletta said.
He said it was normal not to enforce an ordinance that was being amended until it is finalized. He pointed to the original landlords’ ordinance, adopted in 2004. He noted it underwent several revisions until it was finally adopted in the summer of that year.

“Obviously, we didn’t begin enforcing it until we were finished revising it,” Barletta said. “And that’s exactly the same in this case. We will enforce the finalized ordinance.”

“This is a procedural agreement and nothing more than that,” city Solicitor Chris Slusser said. “It allows them an opportunity to see the next version of the ordinance, an opportunity to amend their complaint against it and us a chance to respond to their amended complaint.”

Slusser said he believed the revisions would make the resulting ordinance “bullet proof.”

Barletta called PRLDEF’s media release “an attempt to delay our adoption of the amended ordinance.”

“Hazleton is the test case, and they know that,” Barletta said. “If they can give other cities the impression that Hazleton backed down, they think the others will back down.”

“The people behind this challenge thought our small city would be an easy target,” Barletta said. “But Hazleton has not backed down. We will not back down!”