Thread: Appeals court rules against Redondo Beach stings

http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/articles/1589117.html


Appeals court rules against Redondo Beach stings

Decision disallows the city from using its solicitation ordinance to prevent people from seeking day work.

By Kristin S. Agostoni
Daily Breeze

A federal appeals court panel has upheld a ruling barring Redondo Beach from using its solicitation ordinance to prevent day laborers from seeking work along city streets.

In an opinion rendered late last week, a trio of judges from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined to overturn a preliminary injunction issued in December by U.S. District Court Judge Consuelo B. Marshall in response to a group of day laborers who filed suit against the city.




Redondo Beach attorneys had appealed Marshall's decision in hopes of enforcing the solicitation law while the lawsuit unfolds.

"I'm extremely disappointed," City Attorney Jerry Goddard said Monday.

Although Goddard said city officials continue to receive complaints from residents about day laborers congregating near a strip mall at Manhattan Beach Boulevard and Inglewood Avenue, he argued "the city has no enforcement mechanism that can be used to move the group from that location."

"The No. 1 problem is the traffic hazard," Goddard said. "The No. 2 problem is the intimidating effect it has on (shoppers)."

Redondo Beach's controversy over the workers began in October when, prompted by complaints from residents and business owners, police officials conducted a series of undercover sweeps. Dozens of laborers were arrested after they hopped into plainclothes officers' cars believing they were getting work.

The arrests sparked outrage from workers' advocates, drawing a large protest one morning in November at City Hall.

Lawyers for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, on behalf of the Comite de Jornaleros de Redondo Beach, announced they had filed a federal lawsuit against the city, securing Marshall's ruling and ensuring the laborers could continue to seek work.

The lawsuit is pending before Marshall.

MALDEF attorneys applauded the judges' decision Monday, saying it reinforced their beliefs that the city's solicitation ordinance was unjustly applied to the laborers.

"They can still solicit work," MALDEF attorney Shaheena Ahmad Simons said. "And it's also a victory in the fact that the 9th Circuit rejected the city's arguments."

In a statement, MALDEF attorney Thomas A. Saenz said "it is difficult to see how any city can justify continuing to spend public dollars to defend a law with such an abysmal record in legal challenges."

I'm so darned angry that I can't find words! Tongue tied

Thanx DARLENE, for the good work

What about unlawful assembly. Do they have a pernmit to gather in that place? Good for the city for going after them, perhaps they should try a new angle.

congress needs to close the offices of the 9th circuit. They do not represent the views of Americans.

RR

What about immigration status????????

Math time!
(3 Stooges X 3) = 9th circuit

Don't mean to insult the Stooges.

OK, I'm coming back to this in a calm & level headed manner.

What am I missing here? Can anyone look at this and explain how the courts could make this ruling?

What "law" or lack of "law" are they basing this on? There MUST BE a basis for this ruling that we're missing and therefore have no ammunition to even fight it.

I really need some help in understanding this before the next step even comes into play.