Posted on 11/01/2006 7:52:19 AM PST by BradtotheBone
A federal judge on Tuesday blocked the city of Hazleton from enforcing a pair of ordinances targeting illegal immigrants, just hours before the measures were to go into effect. The measures, approved by City Council last month, would have imposed fines on landlords who rent to illegal immigrants and denied business permits to companies that give them jobs. They also would have required tenants to register with City Hall and pay for a rental permit.
U.S. District Judge James Munley ruled that landlords, tenants and businesses that cater to Hispanics faced "irreparable harm" from the laws and issued a temporary restraining order blocking their enforcement.
"We find it in the public interest to protect residents' access to homes, education, jobs and businesses," he wrote in a 13-page opinion.
Hispanic groups and the ACLU sued Hazleton on Monday, contending that the laws trample on the federal government's exclusive power to regulate immigration.
The plaintiffs include the Hazleton Hispanic Business Association, landlords, a restaurateur and several illegal immigrants facing eviction, including children who attend public schools.
Mayor Lou Barletta, who spearheaded the crackdown, has argued that illegal immigrants have brought an increase in drugs, crime and gangs to the city. The city's lawyers on Tuesday cited a 10 percent increase in crime between 2004 and 2005 as a reason why the ordinances should be enforced.
Munley, however, wrote that the city "offers only vague generalizations about the crime allegedly caused by illegal immigrants, but has nothing concrete to back up these claims." The city also failed to provide statistics on the number of illegal immigrants living in Hazleton, he wrote.
Furthermore, Munley wrote, the plaintiffs have a "reasonable probability" of getting the laws declared unconstitutional.
Hazleton's crackdown, which was announced in June, has spurred other towns to pass similar laws. Municipal officials view the Hazleton lawsuit and a similar one in Riverside, N.J., as test cases.
Witold J. Walczak, legal director of the ACLU of Pennsylvania, hailed Tuesday's decision as an important victory.
"I think what's important is the judge recognized that this ordinance has the potential to cause real harm by costing people their jobs, their houses and requiring children to leave schools," he said.
The judge's restraining order expires Nov. 14. He indicated that he will schedule a hearing on the ACLU's motion for a temporary injunction.
Barletta said he is convinced the courts will ultimately uphold the law. He noted his lawyers had only a few hours to prepare for Tuesday's hearing and said he is confident they will "prove our right to defend and protect our citizens."
"I'm not discouraged. They may have delayed enforcement for now, but this too shall pass," Barletta said Tuesday. "We have only begun to fight."
So the "LAW" says its okay to break the LAW......Hmmmmmm
Got to be a Clintoon or" Peanut boy" Judge
Looks like a Clinton appointee.
Clinton appointee to the Middle District of PA federal bench, 1998. No surprises here.
Sounds like the town needs a defense fund started. Wonder if the Minutemen could help?
Thats ok, they knew it was going to be challanged.
That is why they delayed the law the first time, they wanted to work on it and make it very clean leagally, worded well for court, etc.
Plus it may help Santorum in the short run, and it can hold up in court later and its a win/win.
I would reply to the judge, "You have made your ruling, now let's see you enforce it.."
City hired enforcement officers are subjects of the cities and towns that employ them, not of asinine judges who rule in contempt of the people.
People get on bush about immigration but his judges are far better on this than he is.
Alito was getting smeared by the dems in the hearings becauase of his pro security positions on illegal immigration.
I wish the gop would focus in the senate races much more on judges. Especially because the races would be in states that you would think would want a conservative judge more than a liberal judge.
I doubt dobbs will mention that it is a clinton judge.
If dems take over the senate they will tie up all of bush's judges in committee. We need judges like this one replaced with conservatives.
People get on bush about immigration but his judges are far better on this than he is.
Alito was getting smeared by the dems in the hearings becauase of his pro security positions on illegal immigration.
I wish the gop would focus in the senate races much more on judges. Especially because the races would be in states that you would think would want a conservative judge more than a liberal judge.
I doubt dobbs will mention that it is a clinton judge.
If dems take over the senate they will tie up all of bush's judges in committee. We need judges like this one replaced with conservatives.
Boohoo.
Yes and it seems Clintoon was successful in getting quite of few of his lib/activists judges appointed in PA.
Thomas I. Vanaskie (Chief Judge) (Scranton) (nominated by William J. Clinton in 1994; appointed Chief Judge in 1999) ; A. Richard Caputo (Scranton) (nominated by William J. Clinton in 1997) ; James M. Munley (Scranton) (nominated by William J. Clinton in 1998);
If the town wants to crack down on them, why do they let them in their public schools?
(sarcasm off)
Build all the fences you want but unless you get judges who understand that obedience to laws convey certain advantages you will not solve the illegal immigration problem.
I thought this was a state issue-
Why can the federal judge getinto the act?
Where are state's rights on this issue???
So now we have a federal judge telling the cities, counties, and states that it is their fiscal responsibility to foot the bill for the illegals and their children because the federal government refuses to enforce its own laws and secure our borders?
Where in the 'f' is ICE and the Department of Homeland Security on illegal invasion scenario? Spending tax dollars on more radios and computers so they can talk to one another in their cars and email one another while who knows who walks on in?
This thing needs fast tracking to the UNSC. Enough is enough with these judges imposing their personal views on elected legislative bodies.
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.