Thread: MI:Clerk sued over failing to grant marriage licenses to ill

Kent County Clerk sued over failing to grant marriage licenses to illegal immigrants

By Kyla King The Grand Rapids Press
March 31, 2010, 9:00AM

Attorneys for two unnamed West Michigan couples were to file a class action lawsuit in federal court today, claiming the Kent County clerk is violating civil rights by not granting marriage licenses to illegal immigrants who don't have a Social Security number.

The suit, being filed in U.S. District Court in Grand Rapids, says Clerk Mary Hollinrake is breaking state and federal laws by requiring people who apply for marriage licenses but don't have a Social Security number to prove they qualify for two specific exemptions.

It asks a judge to order her to stop and seeks monetary damages and attorney fees.

"This is contrary to the constitution of the United States and Michigan and discriminatory in that it has an effect of discriminating against a large group of the Hispanic community in Kent County," said Robert Alvarez, and attorney from Wyoming whose firm has partnered with a Southfield law office.

Alvarez said he is filing the suit on behalf of two local couples, who are using pseudonyms to protect their identity because two of the four people are here illegally and fear deportation.

The complaint identifies one couple as Juan Doe, a U.S. citizen, and Maria Doe, a citizen of Mexico who lives in Grand Rapids and is ineligible for a Social Security number. The couple -- who have lived together since 2005 and have two children -- say Hollinrake's office denied them a marriage license when Maria was unable to sign a sworn affidavit and provide documentation saying she was exempt from providing a Social Security number under one the two acceptable answers listed.

The second couple is identified as Andrea Doe, a U.S. citizen who lives in Wyoming, and Noe Doe, a Mexican citizen who lives in Grand Rapids and is ineligible for a Social Security number. The couple have been together since 2000 and had to cancel plans to be married at a local church after being denied a marriage license.

affidavit for not providing SS on marriage license in Kent County.jpgView full sizeAffidavit for not providing a Social Security number on an application for a marriage license in Kent County.The suit says Andrea Doe spoke directly with Hollinrake to explain that her fiance, Noe, did not have a Social Security number because of his lack of legal status and was told that was not a sufficient "legal reason" to qualify for an exemption.

When reached Tuesday, Hollinrake said she could not specifically comment on the lawsuit because she had not seen a copy of it. She said her policy is based on federal law, which says each state must require county clerks to collect Social Security numbers on marriage license applications.

County clerks have been collecting the numbers since 2005, when the federal government decided to enforce a little-known law that requires it on marriage license applications in case they are needed to collect child support payments.

Hollinrake's office -- and others throughout the state -- require applicants without a Social Security number to sign a document swearing they do not possess one.

The affidavit Hollinrake uses allows applicants to claim only two exemptions. One is a religious exemption, such as being a member of some Amish and Old Order Mennonite communities that are not issued Social Security cards. The other is listed as a "legal exemption," with examples such as a "citizen of another country with student or finance visa, etc. or other visa, or in the process of becoming a U.S. citizen, for example."

Hollinrake said the document was reviewed and authorized by Kent County attorneys.

"The only time I am not obligated to collect a Social Security number is when they have a religious reason or the other legal exemption," Hollinrake said.

Hollinrake said she would not interpret the lack of legal status as a "legal reason" and has turned down applications because of that.

"We would not accept that because it isn't even logical to write that down as a legal exemption," Hollinrake said.

Alvarez believes this practice is illegally followed to some degree by clerks throughout the state but said it has been difficult to find plaintiffs willing to file suit because of fears of deportation. The suit was filed in Kent County against Hollinrake because the plaintiffs are local, he said.

The issue has been controversial since 2007 with proponents of strict immigration laws.

In 2008, at the request of Republican Sen. Wayne Kuipers of Holland, Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox issue an opinion on the matter. It said a clerk may issue a marriage license to applicants willing to swear they do not have a Social Security number and that county clerks are not authorized to investigate the underlying reason.

Hollinrake said Cox's opinion uses the word "may," while federal law says a clerk "shall" collect the Social Security number.

"I try to follow the law as closely as I can," she said.


http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/ ... ive.com%29

Following Hollinrake's logic, that would certainly put an end to sham marriages for the green card.

You have no rights under the U.S. constitution, it was written for U.S. citizens! NOT LAWBREAKERS FROM ANOTHER COUNTRY!!

Go to the news page and just read the first page of comments. I'm not even going to get into it with my fellow Michiganders. They are prime examples of modern government sponsered educations.

Sorry, but God gave more brains to dead rocks.

"...discriminating against a large group of the Hispanic community in Kent County," said Robert Alvarez, and attorney from Wyoming whose firm has partnered with a Southfield law office.

Why is this attorney saying this? Is he targeting Hispanics as clients? Why would he say such an evil thing about Hispanics? Doesn't he know, not all Hispanics are illegal aliens?

Sorry, I just wanted to act like a wacky Liberal OBLer for a moment.

Dixie

[/quote]

The real issue in this case is money and not marriage. The fact is if someone is allowed to get married without proving who they are than later on if there's a divorce how will the other spouse collect child support, etc.? It's just another con game used by illegal aliens to force the rest of us to pay for them. BTW Federal law controls in this situation not state law.

"We would not accept that because it isn't even logical to write that down as a legal exemption," Hollinrake said.

She makes an excellent point. How can being an illegal alien be considered a legal exemption when being illegal isn't legal.

Let them get married - and they can honeymoon in Mexico courtesy of ICE.

Well, since the American Citizens want to marry illegals, then let them marry them, then do what they did in the old days. The moment they say "I do", they lose their citizenship. My greatgramma lost hers because she married a resident alien. Grand Dad came from Ukraine in 1906, but didn't finally get his citizenship papers until 1928.

At first he didn't want to, then it made it tough on him during WWI since the Ukraine was part of Austria-Hungary. Then we know what happenned in October 1917 with the Red Revolution in Russia, and the Russians invaded the Ukraine and took it, so he had a real tough time after that, because of the communist takeover.

Hollinrake said Cox's opinion uses the word "may," while federal law says a clerk "shall" collect the Social Security number.

"I try to follow the law as closely as I can," she said.

As the OBLers are fond of saying... "It's a federal matter" when states try to enforce immigration laws. Federal law requires that you have to have a SS number. No problem here that I see. Hope they throw this nuisance suit out and deport the criminals.