Thread: Pa. mayor to take immigration law to Supreme Court

Pa. mayor to take immigration law to Supreme Court
By MICHAEL RUBINKAM (AP)

HAZLETON, Pa. — A federal appeals court ruled Thursday that Hazleton, Pa., may not enforce its crackdown on illegal immigrants, dealing another blow to 4-year-old regulations that inspired similar measures around the country. The city's mayor pledged to take the case to the Supreme Court.

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia said that Hazleton's Illegal Immigration Relief Act usurped the federal government's exclusive power to regulate immigration.

"It is ... not our job to sit in judgment of whether state and local frustration about federal immigration policy is warranted. We are, however, required to intervene when states and localities directly undermine the federal objectives embodied in statutes enacted by Congress," wrote Chief Judge Theodore McKee.

Appeals courts are split on whether states and municipalities have the right to enforce laws dealing with immigration. The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments over a 2007 Arizona law that prohibits employers from knowingly hiring illegal immigrants.

Hazleton, a northeastern Pennsylvania city of more than 30,000, had sought to fine landlords who rent to illegal immigrants and deny business permits to companies that give them jobs. A companion measure required prospective tenants to register with City Hall and pay for a rental permit.

Mayor Lou Barletta had pushed the measures in 2006 after two illegal immigrants were charged in a fatal shooting. The Republican mayor, now mounting his third try for Congress, argued that illegal immigrants brought drugs, crime and gangs to the city of more than 30,000 and overwhelmed police, schools and hospitals.

"Hazleton was the first, and became the symbol of hope for many around the country," he said at a news conference after the ruling was released by the appeals court on its website.

"Since I proposed this law more than four years ago, we have seen the growing frustration all across the country," he said, a nod to similar measures in Arizona, Farmers Branch, Texas and Valley Park, Mo.

"This frustration is not going away and it will not go away until the federal government finally secures our borders and cracks down on illegal immigration," he added.

Barletta took no questions but pledged to take the case to the Supreme Court.

"Today's decision by the 3rd Circuit Court is not unexpected. I'm not disillusioned by this ruling," Barletta said. "We knew this would not be the last stop on our journey."

Hispanic groups and illegal immigrants sued to overturn the measures, and a federal judge struck them down following a trial in 2007. The laws have never been enforced.

"This is a major defeat for the misguided, divisive and expensive anti-immigrant strategy that Hazleton has tried to export to the rest of the country," ACLU attorney Omar Jadwat said in a statement.

Hazleton's act was copied by dozens of municipalities around the nation that believe the federal government hasn't done enough to stop illegal immigration.

The crux of the debate has now shifted to Arizona and its strict new law, passed this year, that's also being challenged in court; among other things, it requires police to question the immigration status of people they suspect are in the country illegally.

In the Hazleton case, the appeals court said the city's ordinances conflict with federal immigration law and thus are pre-empted. The employment provision could lead to discrimination against "those perceived as foreign," the court said, while the effort to prevent illegal immigrants from living in Hazleton ignores that it is the federal governments' prerogative to decide who stays and who goes.

The city's law, for example, could force out a college student the federal government has declined to remove, or a battered spouse who could be eligible to stay in the United States under protections afforded by Congress, according to the unanimous decision.

Kris Kobach, a law professor and political candidate in Kansas who worked with Hazleton on its ordinance and represented the city at trial, said Thursday that the 3rd Circuit ignored Supreme Court precedent regarding pre-emption.

"It's going to be difficult for this opinion to stand. The court really had to stretch to find a way to agree with the ACLU," said Kobach, who also helped draft Arizona's immigration law.

Hispanic immigrants began settling in large numbers in Hazleton several years ago, lured from New York, Philadelphia and other cities by cheap housing, low crime and jobs in nearby factories and farms. The city, 80 miles northwest of Philadelphia, estimates its population increased by more than 10,000 between 2000 and 2006.

Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... gD9I4LCCG2

If the USSC rules in favor of the invading illegal aliens and against the Sovereignty of the United States of America, they rule that the United States Constitution is null and void and essentially pronounce a death sentence over The Republic.

End of story.

These Judges are either cowards or, more likely, political hacks kowtowing to those who got them appointed. IMO

good for you Mayor Lou Barletta
my friend live not to far from you * it bad just like nyc as Hillary clinton said they should have the Right to vote why they can not read or write . some have No Dr Lic she Like them so much why don't she come to NYC & see for her self why she want the vote . she was going to be come the President she was told to step a side . that why Obama President Now she Live them so Much have them all for Dinner it just as bad IN NYC as it is in AZ they are coming from all over so check the Birth certificatie to vote they have to be a Citizen & they are not

Related story
http://www.alipac.us/ftopicp-1113948.html#1113948

Originally Posted by Ratbstard

These Judges are either cowards or, more likely, political hacks kowtowing to those who got them appointed. IMO

They are political hacks.

"President Clinton nominated Judge McKee to the Third Circuit on March 22, 1994"

Dixie

POLITICIANS AND JUDGES MUST DEPORT ALL ILLEGAL ALIENS.

I wish we could deport the politicians and Judges along with them.

Originally Posted by Ratbstard

These Judges are either cowards or, more likely, political hacks kowtowing to those who got them appointed. IMO

Chief Judge Theodore McKee.

Clowns like this need to be removed from office and tried for treason.

Pennsylvania City Threatens Supreme Court Battle After Immigration Ruling

Published September 13, 2010
| FoxNews.com


The town of Hazleton, Pa., is threatening a Supreme Court showdown after a panel of judges last week threw out its restrictions against hiring and renting to illegal immigrants, a decision supporters say gives Washington a free pass to ignore its enforcement responsibilities.

Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta, who has championed his city's crackdown in the face of persistent legal challenges, told Fox News on Monday that the federal appeals court ruling was a "blow" to cities trying to shield themselves from the "drain" of illegal immigration.

"The problem is that the federal government refuses to regulate the immigration problems that we're having in Hazleton and yet tells us that we can't defend ourselves," he said.

Hazleton's ordinance inspired dozens of imitation laws across the country. The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals decision would not directly invalidate those laws on a national level, but they could be on the line if the case makes its way to the Supreme Court. Barletta said he intends to appeal.

The Supreme Court has already agreed to review a conflicting decision out of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in which the court came down in favor of an Arizona law dealing with the employment of illegal immigrants. That law is separate from the controversial state law requiring police officers to inquire about immigration status.

Avocates of the Hazleton law said the 3rd Circuit ignored a lower court ruling in a separate case in Missouri as well as the earlier Arizona decision, and its decision effectively allows the federal government to hold off on its own enforcement while preventing local officials from stepping in.

"The 3rd Circuit accepted a tried and true formula of the ACLU and its allies that immigration law is too complicated for states to do anything other than dole out services at taxpayer expense, regardless of residency," Dan Stein, president of The Federation for American Immigration Reform, said in a written statement. "This line of argument allows the federal government to continue to mismanage immigration while sending the states into financial chaos and ruin."

Hazleton's ordinances allowed the city to punish landlords found to be renting to illegal immigrants and punish employers found to be hiring them.

The ruling last week accused Hazleton of enacting a "regulatory scheme" that amounted to "cherry picking" which aspects of federal law it wanted to enforce.

"It has chosen to disregard Congress' other objectives -- protecting lawful immigrants and others from employment discrimination, and minimizing the burden imposed on employers," the ruling said.

Though advocates of tough illegal immigration laws on the local level say they're filling a void left by the federal government, the panel of judges suggested in the 188-page ruling that inaction by the federal government is immaterial.

"Such power is delegated by the Constitution exclusively to the federal government, and even if Congress had never acted in the field, states and localities would be precluded from doing so," the ruling said, citing in part a 1976 Supreme Court decision that examined where local governments could regulate immigration. That ruling found that local governments could not enact laws that try to determine who can and cannot live in the country.

The ruling last week also said that "even harmonious regulation is pre-empted" when it comes to housing, but that Hazleton's housing restrictions went beyond federal law.

"It is clear that it has attempted to usurp authority that the Constitution has placed beyond the vicissitudes of local governments," the ruling said.

The ACLU, which has been fighting the Hazleton measures since the first ordinance was adopted in late 2006, hailed the ruling as a landmark victory. The civil rights group said the policies ran afoul of the Constitution and discriminated against Hispanics.

"Divisive laws like these destroy communities and distract from the very real problems that local governments are facing across the country," lead attorney Vic Walczak said in a written statement. "Immigration reform needs to come from the federal level. Local ordinances like these have a toxic effect on the community, injecting suspicion and discriminatory attitudes where they didn't previously exist."

But Hazleton advocates said the ruling tied the hands of local government.

"Today's decision makes the 3rd Circuit the most liberal court in America on immigration issues," Barletta said in a statement after the ruling. "But our fight is not yet over. The City of Hazleton fully intends to appeal this incorrect decision and take the case all the way to the United States Supreme Court, if necessary."

http://oneoldvet.com/

www.foxnews.com