Judge blocks anti-illegal alien ordinance in Hazleton, Pennsylvania

Hazleton has been in the news over the last few months, because of a proposed ordinance (similar to Escondido, California) that would crack down on illegal immigration. The two major parts of the ordinance are: not allowing landlords to rent to illegals, and denying business licenses to those who employ illegal aliens. Per usual, the ACLU sued saying the law was unconstitutional. And now, US District Court judge James Munley (a Clinton administration appointee) has blocked the ordinance hours before the ordinance would have been in effect. Here's the legal decision (Adobe Acrobat PDF format). Story from the AP.

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.

I'm sorry, but I'm just not buying it. If they face "irreparable harm", it is because they rely on illegal immigrants to make money. In that case, I don't feel the least bit bad about these businesses losing money. Also, legal decisions should not be made based on the fact that businesses may face financial losses if a law is enforced. This sets a bad precedent that will only lead to more lawsuits.

"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.

Since when are illegal immigrants allowed to be plaintiffs in an American lawsuit? The case should have been thrown out because of that. In my opinion, illegal aliens have no standing to sue in American courts to block enforcement.

It appears that the plaintiffs deliberately waited until the last second, in an attempt to obstruct the new ordinance. They could've brought the suit right after the ordinance was passed, instead they waited until days before the ordinance became effective.


Others blogging on this topic:
Diggers Realm
Freedom Folks
Immigration Watchdog