Posted on 06/25/2008 9:33:53 AM PDT by VU4G10
A judge is scheduled to rule today on a challenge to a taxpayer suit that seeks to repeal a long-standing directive prohibiting Los Angeles police officers from asking arrestees about their immigration status.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Rolf M. Treu is being asked by the city and the American Civil Liberties Union to dismiss the lawsuit on grounds there are no triable issues. He heard arguments on the motion June 10 and has had it under submission since then.
Los Angeles resident Harold P. Sturgeon filed suit in May 2006 against police Chief William J. Bratton and members of the Police Commission, seeking to have Special Order 40 declared unlawful.
In court papers, Sturgeon's lawyers call Special Order 40 "essentially a `Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy regarding illegal aliens."
Sturgeon is requesting that a permanent injunction be issued to prevent taxpayer money from being used to enforce it. He and other critics say the 28- year-old mandate from the Los Angeles City Council hampers the LAPD's ability to exchange information with federal immigration officials.
The order is intended to avoid discouraging illegal immigrants from reporting crimes and assisting police.
In their court papers, lawyers for the City Attorney's Office maintain the directive does not prevent the LAPD from working closely with federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials.
"There is no evidence ... to show that ICE has ever
complained that they have not had the assistance of LAPD, or that LAPD has not come when they are called," the city's court papers state. In their court papers, ACLU lawyers maintain Special Order 40 is consistent with federal law and not in conflict with it.
Paul J. Orfanedes of Judicial Watch Inc., one of Sturgeon's lawyers, maintains the order is a misapplication of his client's taxpayer dollars. He also contends the order is being applied in a broader way than the text of it allows.
Deputy City Attorney Vibiana M. Andrade said Sturgeon's lawyers have not shown any pattern of unconstitutional enforcement of Special Order 40.
Treu ruled in September 2006 that four groups that assist undocumented immigrants can intervene as defendants in the case. They are working with the City Attorney's Office to keep Special Order 40 on the books.
The ACLU of Southern California represents the four community groups: Break the Cycle; Los Jornaleros (The Day Laborers); El Comite de Jornaleros (The Committee of Day Laborers); and El Instituto de Educacion Popular del Sur de California (The Institute of Popular Education of Southern California).
ACLU attorney Hector O. Villagra said after the June 10 hearing that he was encouraged by the tenor of Treu's questions, many of which focused on conflicts in law and whether Sturgeon believes the order as a whole is unconstitutional, or only when applied in certain instances.
If Treu denies the city's motion and the case goes to trial -- now tentatively set for Monday -- the city has listed Chief William Bratton on its list of possible witnesses.
Sturgeon's lawyers have included KABC AM morning radio host Doug McIntyre -- who did an on-air interview with Bratton in March 2007 -- on their witness list. McIntyre has been a strident critic of what he maintains is the lax enforcement of immigration laws.
Last year, the Los Angeles City Council went on record against any future federal legislation that would force the Los Angeles Police Department to change its policy on identifying undocumented immigrants.
Debate over the issue was reignited earlier this year when Jamiel Shaw Jr., a high school football star, was killed -- allegedly by a reputed gang member who was in the country illegally. The suspect, Pedro Espinoza, had been released from county jail the day before the slaying.
Special Order 40 did not apply in that case because Espinoza's original arrest was outside the city of Los Angeles and he was housed in a Los Angeles County jail. However, the killing prompted Councilman Dennis Zine to introduce a motion to amend the policy, allowing police to investigate the immigration status of gang members they think may be in the country illegally, whether or not they are suspected of other crimes.
Numerous city officials from all over the country have publicly stated that laws should not be followed. In this case its immigration law.
Seems to me that any elected or appointed official supporting unlawful behavior of any type should be removed from office.
ping
We are a nation of laws, and if our elected officials refuse to enforce laws and set up "sacred cows" who are allowed to break laws, then chaos will follow.
It is tragic that some of our churches also teach breaking laws and sect up sanctuaries for those who invade this country. This sends a terrible message to us parents who try to teach our children to respect laws.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.