landmark ruling anticipated in immigration case today

Forums Home | The FireWire | Breaking News

Posts 1-9 of 9 | Latest Post
July 26, 2007 08:38 AM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 11, 2007

The right of towns to protect themselves by promulgating laws concerning

illegal aliens could be impacted today by U.S. District Judge James M. Munley.

Hazelton, Pa. has an ordinance prohibiting renting to and employing illegal aliens.

The ACLU has challenged Hazelton’s right to make an ordinance concerning illegal aliens. Judge Munley is anticipated to announce his decision on the full trial today.

The Standard –Speaker reports on 7-26-07 in an article written by Wade Malcolm “The key component of the decision will be whether Hazleton’s Illegal Immigration Relief Act “pre-empts” U.S. immigration laws by interfering with the federal government’s sole authority over immigration.”

 The following is an article from the Standard-Speaker (7-26-07) written by Wade Malcom:

Decision Day: Judge expected to rule on Illegal Immigration Relief Act today http://www.standardspeaker.com/index2..., 'win2', 'status=no,toolbar=no,scrollbars=yes,titlebar=no,menubar=no,resizable=yes,width=640,height=480,directories=no,location=no');" title="Print">Print http://www.standardspeaker.com/index2..., 'win2', 'status=no,toolbar=no,scrollbars=yes,titlebar=no,menubar=no,resizable=yes,width=400,height=250,directories=no,location=no');" title="E-mail">E-mail
Thursday, 26 July 2007
By WADE MALCOLM
Staff Writer
A federal judge is expected to rule today on the constitutionality of Hazleton’s illegal immigration ordinance, setting the stage for a long-awaited decision that could affect dozens of communities locally and hundreds more around the country.
U.S. District Judge James M. Munley’s ruling in the landmark case will decide whether local governments, specifically Hazleton, have the right to pass laws dealing with illegal immigrants by punishing landlords and employers doing business with them.
The American Civil Liberties Union and several other advocacy groups sued the city in federal court on behalf of residents and community groups, arguing the ordinance infringed on the civil rights of Latinos and conflicted with federal immigration law. A nine-day trial was held in March at the William J. Nealon Federal Building in Scranton.
Although judges have ruled on illegal ordinances in other parts of the country, Munley’s would be the first following a full trial, giving it more precedent-setting power.
The decision will “most likely” be released early this afternoon, said John Garcia, spokesman for the Puerto Rican Defense and Education Fund, one of the groups suing the city.
“Our lawyers and all the clients are preparing for a decision to come (today),” he said.
Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta cut a family vacation short and planned a press conference in anticipation that Munley will issue the ruling today.
“We’ve waited a long time,” said Barletta, who plans to talk about the ruling at 4 p.m. today in the Hazleton City Council chambers. “Regardless of what the ruling is, it will be part of the history of Hazleton as a monumental decision in a case that the whole nation will be watching.”
Hazleton has been at the heart of that national debate since July 2006, when it passed the ordinance forbidding hiring or renting to illegal immigrants. The law was believed to be the first of its kind passed in the entire country. A separate ordinance, not challenged in the lawsuit, made English the official language. Hundreds of municipalities around the country — and at least two dozen in Northeastern Pennsylvania — passed or considered copycat laws.
“What I’ve been hearing in the months that we’ve been waiting is how many cities have been waiting for a decision,” Barletta said. “This isn’t just for Hazleton.”
The key component of the decision will be whether Hazleton’s Illegal Immigration Relief Act “pre-empts” U.S. immigration laws by interfering with the federal government’s sole authority over immigration.
If Munley decides it does, it would stop many municipalities from going forward with their own illegal immigration ordinances put on hold while awaiting the Hazleton decision.
But, “if the judge gives the green light, you’re going to see these laws all across the country, and you’re going to see a whole lot more lawsuits,” ACLU attorney Witold “Vic” Walczak said.
“Right now, everybody’s watching what happens here in Hazleton,” said Joseph Romanoskey, a Larksville Borough councilman. “Whatever happens there, other communities will follow.”
Wilkes-Barre City Council President Bill Barrett said he’s had informal talks with City Solicitor Tim Henry about amending the rental ordinance to make it similar to Hazleton’s ordinance.
“If the decision is favorable toward Hazleton, then that might be something that we would like,” he said.
Attorneys involved said they were notified Wednesday afternoon that a decision was coming today.
Munley had previously indicated he would give the lawyers 48 hours’ notice when he reached a decision.
But Dr. Agapito Lopez, a leader in Hazleton’s Hispanic community who testified during the trial, said Munley opted not to give as much lead time for “security” reasons after his agreeing to give advance warning appeared in local newspapers.
The debate in Hazleton has drawn crowds of demonstrators to several rallies and public meetings in the past year, and the 48-hour window would have allowed for similar attention surrounding the decision, Lopez said.
“Apparently, (the two-days notice) was something that the press wasn’t supposed to know. He was going to make it only known to the lawyers,” Lopez said. “He was afraid for security measures that something would happen.”

Andrew Staub, staff writer, contributed to this report.
wmalcolm@citizensvoice.com

July 26, 2007 08:51 AM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 11, 2007

The right of towns to protect themselves by promulgating laws concerning

illegal aliens could be impacted today by U.S. District Judge James M. Munley.

Hazelton, Pa. has an ordinance prohibiting renting to and employing illegal aliens.

The ACLU has challenged Hazelton’s right to make ordinances concerning illegal aliens. Judge Munley is anticipated to announce his decision on the full trial today.

The Standard –Speaker reports on 7-26-07 in an article written by Wade Malcolm “The key component of the decision will be whether Hazleton’s Illegal Immigration Relief Act “pre-empts” U.S. immigration laws by interfering with the federal government’s sole authority over immigration.”

The following is an article from the Standard-Speaker (7-26-07) by Wade Malcolm:

 
Decision Day: Judge expected to rule on Illegal Immigration Relief Act today http://www.standardspeaker.com/index2..., 'win2', 'status=no,toolbar=no,scrollbars=yes,titlebar=no,menubar=no,resizable=yes,width=640,height=480,directories=no,location=no');" title="Print">Print http://www.standardspeaker.com/index2..., 'win2', 'status=no,toolbar=no,scrollbars=yes,titlebar=no,menubar=no,resizable=yes,width=400,height=250,directories=no,location=no');" title="E-mail">E-mail
Thursday, 26 July 2007
By WADE MALCOLM
Staff Writer
A federal judge is expected to rule today on the constitutionality of Hazleton’s illegal immigration ordinance, setting the stage for a long-awaited decision that could affect dozens of communities locally and hundreds more around the country.
U.S. District Judge James M. Munley’s ruling in the landmark case will decide whether local governments, specifically Hazleton, have the right to pass laws dealing with illegal immigrants by punishing landlords and employers doing business with them.
The American Civil Liberties Union and several other advocacy groups sued the city in federal court on behalf of residents and community groups, arguing the ordinance infringed on the civil rights of Latinos and conflicted with federal immigration law. A nine-day trial was held in March at the William J. Nealon Federal Building in Scranton.
Although judges have ruled on illegal ordinances in other parts of the country, Munley’s would be the first following a full trial, giving it more precedent-setting power.
The decision will “most likely” be released early this afternoon, said John Garcia, spokesman for the Puerto Rican Defense and Education Fund, one of the groups suing the city.
“Our lawyers and all the clients are preparing for a decision to come (today),” he said.
Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta cut a family vacation short and planned a press conference in anticipation that Munley will issue the ruling today.
“We’ve waited a long time,” said Barletta, who plans to talk about the ruling at 4 p.m. today in the Hazleton City Council chambers. “Regardless of what the ruling is, it will be part of the history of Hazleton as a monumental decision in a case that the whole nation will be watching.”
Hazleton has been at the heart of that national debate since July 2006, when it passed the ordinance forbidding hiring or renting to illegal immigrants. The law was believed to be the first of its kind passed in the entire country. A separate ordinance, not challenged in the lawsuit, made English the official language. Hundreds of municipalities around the country — and at least two dozen in Northeastern Pennsylvania — passed or considered copycat laws.
“What I’ve been hearing in the months that we’ve been waiting is how many cities have been waiting for a decision,” Barletta said. “This isn’t just for Hazleton.”
The key component of the decision will be whether Hazleton’s Illegal Immigration Relief Act “pre-empts” U.S. immigration laws by interfering with the federal government’s sole authority over immigration.
If Munley decides it does, it would stop many municipalities from going forward with their own illegal immigration ordinances put on hold while awaiting the Hazleton decision.
But, “if the judge gives the green light, you’re going to see these laws all across the country, and you’re going to see a whole lot more lawsuits,” ACLU attorney Witold “Vic” Walczak said.
“Right now, everybody’s watching what happens here in Hazleton,” said Joseph Romanoskey, a Larksville Borough councilman. “Whatever happens there, other communities will follow.”
Wilkes-Barre City Council President Bill Barrett said he’s had informal talks with City Solicitor Tim Henry about amending the rental ordinance to make it similar to Hazleton’s ordinance.
“If the decision is favorable toward Hazleton, then that might be something that we would like,” he said.
Attorneys involved said they were notified Wednesday afternoon that a decision was coming today.
Munley had previously indicated he would give the lawyers 48 hours’ notice when he reached a decision.
But Dr. Agapito Lopez, a leader in Hazleton’s Hispanic community who testified during the trial, said Munley opted not to give as much lead time for “security” reasons after his agreeing to give advance warning appeared in local newspapers.
The debate in Hazleton has drawn crowds of demonstrators to several rallies and public meetings in the past year, and the 48-hour window would have allowed for similar attention surrounding the decision, Lopez said.
“Apparently, (the two-days notice) was something that the press wasn’t supposed to know. He was going to make it only known to the lawyers,” Lopez said. “He was afraid for security measures that something would happen.”

Andrew Staub, staff writer, contributed to this report.
wmalcolm@citizensvoice.com

Next >

     
July 26, 2007 08:59 AM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 8, 2007
I sure hope they do constitutional research as the states there have the ability to decide who will live within their borders from what I understand. To say the feds have sole controle over this is an utter lie that they have been selling for a long time and no one has  been standing up to them.


Deport congress and the president!!
July 26, 2007 09:14 AM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 8, 2007

This section 9 is from Article 1

Section 9. The migration or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person.

Plus in state rights the federal government is to protect the states from invasion, and they have not done that and prevent states from excersizing their own rights.




Deport congress and the president!!
July 26, 2007 11:47 AM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
July 25, 2007

Maria Lynn

Please post Judge Munley's decision when it is released.




I don't mind what the opposition say of me so long as they don't tell the truth about me. But when they descend to telling the truth about me I consider that this is taking an unfair advantage. Samuel Clemens (M.T.)
July 26, 2007 11:49 AM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 22, 2007
A WIN for hazelton is a WIN FOR AMERICA!
July 26, 2007 12:34 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
June 4, 2007
Good grief, another wide post that I have to scroll and scroll to read.
July 26, 2007 12:56 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
March 15, 2007

I keep trying to download it but am getting errors.  I will try to post here so everyone can see:

 http://coop.pamd.uscourts.gov/06v1586.pdf

I hope you can pull it up without errors.

 

July 26, 2007 01:21 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
May 22, 2007

Man.....  I do not know how to fix this one and it

double posted.  Suggest move discussion to the

thread posted by TonyH

Judge strikes down Hazelton Ordinance

and let this thread die.

 

 




GET CONGRESS ATTENTION! CHANGE YOUR W-4 AT WORK AND CLAIM 10 DEPENDENTS SO NO TAXES WILL BE TAKEN FROM YOUR PAYCHECK. WHEN THE MONEY STOPS COMING IN MAYBE THEY WILL REMEMBER THEY ARE SERVANTS TO WE THE PEOPLE.

You must login to discuss this item.