Groups update argument against Alabama immigration law

al.com
Published: Friday, September 16, 2011, 10:15 PM Updated: Friday, September 16, 2011, 10:29 PM
By Brian Lawson, The Huntsville Times

HUNTSVILLE, Alabama -- Meeting a Friday deadline, lawyers for 36 plaintiffs seeking to block Alabama's immigration law filed a 13-count argument that the law is broadly unconstitutional.

The plaintiffs filed their lawsuit in July. Earlier this month U.S. District Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn gave them 10 days to revise the complaint to be more specific about each plaintiff's claims.

The 36 plaintiffs include the Hispanic Interest Coalition of Alabama, other civil rights groups, unions, parents of immigrant children, lawyers, ministries and 12 illegal immigrants.

Friday's filing was similar to the original complaint, said the attorney who filed it, Sam Brooke of the Southern Poverty Law Center.

"We filed the amended complaint to address technical issues raised by the court in its September 6 order," he said. "These changes are independent of our request for a preliminary injunction, which we expect will be ruled on soon."

Blackburn is also considering lawsuits brought by the U.S. Department of Justice and a group of Alabama church leaders, both seeking to block the law's implementation. The law was set to go into effect Sept. 1.

Following a hearing in August, Blackburn granted a temporary injunction to give herself more time to consider whether the law is constitutional. Blackburn has said she will rule on the efforts to block the law by Sept. 28.

The Beason-Hammon Alabama Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act provides civil and criminal penalties for illegal immigrants found in Alabama and those who knowingly disregard their immigration status and do business with them or provide them services.

It also bars immigrants from attending Alabama colleges and universities and seeks to gather information about the immigration status of schoolchildren and their parents.

The lawsuit argues the Alabama law would usurp the federal government's immigration policies and enforcement priorities. Similar measures in Arizona, Georgia, Indiana and Utah directing law enforcement personnel to investigate immigration status during traffic stops have been blocked by the federal courts, the suit argues.

The plaintiffs argue the ban on transactions between an illegal immigrant and a state or political subdivision could also a have range of unexpected consequences, especially if proof of legal immigration status or citizenship is required.

"It also reaches such basic, everyday conduct as applying for a public library card, paying municipal property taxes, applying and paying for water, sewer, and garbage service, paying for a parking permit on a municipal street, or applying for a fishing license," the revised filing argued.

It noted that the Montgomery Water Works and Sanitary Sewer Board started requiring any new applicants for water or sewer services to prove their immigration status before they could obtain service. That practice ended, the filing notes, after the board was told the law had been temporarily enjoined.

"The Allgood, Alabama Water Works company has also posted a sign in its office stating that 'to be compliant with new laws concerning immigration, [water customers] must have an Alabama driver's license or an Alabama picture ID card on file at this office before September 29, 2011, or you may lose water service,'" according to the filing.

Source: http://blog.al.com/breaking/2011/09/gro ... ainst.html