It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Federal Judge Blocks Illegal Immigration Ordinances in Hazelton, PA

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 02:56 AM
link   
U.S. District Judge James Munley issued a temporary restraining order blocking the enforcement of city ordinances which impose new fines on landlords who rent to illegal immigrants, as well as denies business permits to companies that hire them. The laws were due to take effect on November 1, but were challenged in a law suit by the ACLU and Hispanic groups. The restraining order expires November 14, pending a hearing on the plaintiff's motion for a temporary injunction.
 



www.cbsnews.com
Mayor Lou Barletta, who spearheaded the law, 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.”

Hazleton's crackdown, which was announced in June, has received national attention and spurred other towns to pass similar laws, saying that the federal government has not done enough about illegal immigration. Municipal officials view the Hazleton lawsuit and a similar one in Riverside, New Jersey, as test cases.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


While in other cases I might agree with this blockage due to its technically belonging in the federal domain, in this case, due to the lack of federal action on the matter, and to the obvious lack of local enforcement, I strongly disagree with that judge.

This is one town that after years of abuse said "enough," and decided to something about the illegal immigrants invading their space. If the government won't do anything, the people will, and I believe that becomes their right when authorities are ineffectual.

The effect on the town since the passing of those laws has been quite dramatic, with many or most of the illegals taking flight to more receptive areas. Goal achieved, and the laws hadn't even gone to effect yet!


Hispanics flee Pa. town as first-of-its-kind law targeting illegal immigrants goes into effect

On Wednesday, a tough, first-of-its-kind law targeting illegal immigrants goes into effect in this small hillside city in northeastern Pennsylvania. But the evidence suggests many Hispanics _ illegal or otherwise _ have already left.

That, in turn, has hobbled the city's Hispanic business district, where some shops have closed and others are struggling to stay open.

Hispanics began settling in large numbers in Hazleton several years ago, lured from New York, Philadelphia and other cities by cheap housing, low crime and the availability of work in nearby factories and farms. The city, situated 80 miles from Philadelphia, estimates its population has increased from 23,000 to 31,000 over the past six years, with Hispanics now representing 30 percent of the population.


The article goes on to point out that it has hurt certain businesses in the Hispanic section of town, and that is to be expected to some extent wherever this occurs. But in my view it was business that was built on false, illegal dreams in the first place. When is corporate America going to stop relying on illegal immigrant labor to offset rising costs and gain an unfair competitive advantage in the marketplace?

Answer: when American towns such as Hazelton are forced to take the issue into their own hands and DO something about it, apparently.

Related News Links:
www.cbsnews.com
www.washingtonpost.com
www.usatoday.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
politics.abovetopsecret.com...
politics.abovetopsecret.com...
politics.abovetopsecret.com...
politics.abovetopsecret.com...




posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 08:27 PM
link   
From: www.boston.com


Barletta said yesterday that Hazleton's residents are ``prepared to take the fight to the highest court in the United States if we have to," and have arranged a legal defense fund to defray the city's legal costs. Even if the ordinance fails the legal challenge, Barletta said, it will still have been worth it, because illegal immigrants are leaving.

``It's been incredible. We have literally seen people loading up mattresses and furniture and leaving the city en masse," he said. ``That was our goal, to have a city of legal immigrants who are all paying taxes. It's already been effective."



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 08:30 PM
link   
At least the town isnt rolling over and just letting this die. Good for them, they are still fighting this.



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 08:32 PM
link   
He's a Clinton appointee so don't be surprised if he's reversed by the Circuit or Supreme Court.

This is actually an interesting question in our federal system.



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 08:33 PM
link   
This judge is a moron and an embarrassment to his profession.


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."


Can anyone spot why this comment is beyond retarded? Obviously we have to prove that ILLEGAL immigrants have committed a crime, breaking a federal stature and thereby committing a felony, for whatever reason, is evidently not a crime, go figure


[edit on 1-11-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 08:37 PM
link   
ROFL westpoint! I didn't even think of that. DUH. *smacks meeself* GREAT POINT. The friggin judge is sitting there saying that there is no evidence that ILLEGALS have done anything illegal. Hell, just ask for an authentic green card. That simple.



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 08:43 PM
link   
Perhaps the reason this judge is acting the way he is, is because he may have some political agenda for the future and doesn't want to kill the prospect of Hispanic voters on its side.

Remember in the world of politics we are nothing that the pieces on the political game.

So he is allowing for this bill to reach higher than his circuit.


When something can not be done at the judge level, guess who is in line next.


He is just washing his hand of it.

[edit on 1-11-2006 by marg6043]



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Here the American public is searching for a solution to illegal immigration, and this tiny little town just showed the big boys how to do it, for Christ's sakes. What more do they need?

Issue legislation at the national level that permits local cities and towns to vote on their own illegal immigrant laws!

DONE DEAL, and 90% of this problem will be solved!


[edit on 1-11-2006 by TrueAmerican]



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 09:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Issue legislation at the national level that permits local cities and towns to vote on their own illegal immigrant laws!



He is a district judge he is leaving the issue to the next court higher up. Once nothing can be done at the judges level then it will reach to the the state legislation.

Is very simple and he is doing something that he can not possible deal with in his own level.

Immigration is big issue that is right now in congress.

The judge can not take positions because then if something is reached in congress whatever he has rule on it will be changed.



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Marg,
I am suggesting that as a solution to the problem. It works. That is what Hazelton just proved. They took away the economic incentive from landlords and business, and by doing so took away the incentive for the illegal immigrants to stay there. Notice that they made no law directly against the illegals themselves! They merely required a simple registration at City Hall for renters, for a small fee of $10. They threatened no one with going after them or anything like that.

The plan was brilliant in its simplicity, and you see the effect. Illegals flew out of there like they were being chased by bulldogs. If every city was allowed to vote on similar laws, then by far most cities in the US will clear out of illegal labor. They will most likely then only be able to gather in illegal-friendly places, which would probably be US border towns, or be forced to go back to their countries of origin.

I am not saying that anything should change at the federal level, other than to toughen the laws as they sit. I am proposing that local ordinances such as those in Hazelton be approved at the federal level- because it worked.



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Marg,
I am suggesting that as a solution to the problem. It works. That is what Hazelton just proved.


Then the problem may be with the a personal issue on the part of the judge, like I say before he may have some personal agenda.



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 02:55 PM
link   
I wouldn't be too sure about the Supreme Court in Pennsylvania right now. I think that they are trying take the title away from the Ninth Circuit Court.

My hats off to Hazleton. If they start getting short on money to fight these idiotic lawsuits I think I can find a bit to send them.

Of all the problems out there right now I find it hard to believe that the ACLU has nothing better to do with it's resources than to fight this law.



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 04:15 PM
link   
I believe ultimately Hazeltown's city ordinance (that the judge placed an injunction against) will be found to be in violation of one or more parts of the constitution and be struck down permanently. What the mayor and city council are attempting to do is laudable in many ways but reprehensible in others. The attorney for the defendants is right on in his arguments against the ordinance.



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astronomer70
I believe ultimately Hazeltown's city ordinance (that the judge placed an injunction against) will be found to be in violation of one or more parts of the constitution and be struck down permanently. What the mayor and city council are attempting to do is laudable in many ways but reprehensible in others. The attorney for the defendants is right on in his arguments against the ordinance.


How is this law unconstitutional? I have got to hear this. This law shouldn't even have to have been passed. Every year I have to show proof of my right to work in the US. A form is filled out by my employer and sent to the Government. This law is ordering landlords to show that their tenants are legally allowed to be in the US. How is this any different? If the Government enforced the laws we already have there would be no need for Hazleton's law.



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 04:29 PM
link   
The way to stop all of this is stiff fines for landlords and employers that cater to illegals.

I don't care who is gonna do it but that is the place to start. People that cater to them do it for financial reasons so you have to remove the incentive in the first place.



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 04:32 PM
link   
I agree with JIMC5499, if the Federal Authorities were doing their jobs instead of taking bribes from the illegals we wouldn't have this mess we have today. I have a McDonalds Restaurant just down the street and not one of the employees there is fluent in english, people are forced to order in spanish with many of their employees, and I'll bet that their 'paperwork' is all forgeries.

I see nothing Unconstitutional in the laws, yet I do see a major violation by the Administration and it's cohorts to subvert and ignore the Laws of this nation. I guess that when they take the oath of office they are crossing their fingers behind their back? The Constitution may be "just a damned piece of paper", but it is the Law, and when the law can be openly ignored by the Government then it can be openly ignored by the People as well. Throw the monkeys out of power!



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 05:55 PM
link   
I've stated this in many other threads, but I think it bears repeating here:
It's not just the President that has to take an Oath to "preserve, defend & uphold" the Constitution, but that also includes all Offices of all three Branches (Legislative, Judicial & Executive) at both Federal & State levels!

When taking the Oath, they legally bind themselves to the Constitution as a legal contract! Any time that any of those Offices either supports/maintains existence of, or creates any new breaches to any part of the Constitution, it's grounds for removal from Office & indictment in court; Breaching this particular contract is, BTW, a federal crime!

It doesn't matter if they think that the Constitution is "outdated/outmoded/whatever"...It's irrelevant! They are still bound to it legally!



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 09:28 AM
link   
Here's another example of a small town dealing with illegal immigration:



NEW IPSWICH, N.H. -- W. Garrett Chamberlain, chief of police in this bucolic town near the Massachusetts border, was tired of having to release the undocumented immigrants his officers had picked up on routine stops, so he decided to do something about it: He would cite them for trespassing.

A few weeks ago, one of Chamberlain's officers came upon Jorge Mora Ramirez, who was making a phone call from his car. Questioned by the officer, Ramirez, a 21-year-old who is Mexican, admitted he was in the country illegally, Chamberlain said. The chief called Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, but they declined to send someone over to pick up Ramirez. Chamberlain applied the only state statute he could think of.

''My position was: If Mr. Ramirez was in the country illegally, he was obviously in the town of New Ipswich illegally," Chamberlain said.

Trespassing


Trespassing! Brilliant.

Guess what ICE said? A local police chielf has no authority to determine if someone is in the country illegally!



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 10:11 AM
link   
lol, thanks for that jsobecky!


Tresspassing. Out of all the stories on illegal immigration, I can't think of a single one that even mentions it. Wow, sometimes brilliance DOES lie in simplicity. Nail em all for tresspassing on American property. Simple. Legal. Local. Nationwide. I love it.



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Trespassing! Brilliant.
Guess what ICE said? A local police chielf has no authority to determine if someone is in the country illegally!

The "brilliant" part was ICE's reply: How much brains does ICE need to notice that the ILLEGAL actually admitted to being ILLEGAL to the Police Chief!




top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join