Make of this what you will:

PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania (Reuters) -- A federal judge Tuesday temporarily barred Hazleton, Pennsylvania, from implementing a law designed to prevent illegal immigrants from living in the town.

Judge James Munley of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania issued a temporary restraining order against Hazleton City Council, preventing it from enforcing its Illegal Immigration Relief Act Ordinance.

The measure has become a model for other U.S. towns that blame illegal immigrants for a range of social problems.

The law, which had been scheduled to take effect Wednesday, would fine landlords found to be renting space to illegal aliens, close down businesses that hire them, and allow legal employees to sue the businesses for employment lost during such a shutdown. A related law also establishes English as the town's official language.

The restraining order is valid until November 14.

In a 13-page opinion, Munley said immigrants risked "irreparable injury" by being evicted from their apartments if the law is enforced. He also said he was not convinced by the city council's argument that illegal immigration increases crime and overburdens social services.

"Defendant offers only vague generalizations about the crime allegedly caused by illegal immigrants but has nothing concrete to back up these claims," Munley wrote.

He added that since the plaintiffs -- representing the town's Hispanic community -- claim the law affects constitutionally protected rights, it is in the public interest to delay enforcement of the ordinance until a court can consider its constitutional implications.

About a third of Hazleton's 31,000 residents are immigrants from Central America. According to local civil rights activists, about a quarter of the town's immigrant population is in the United States illegally.

The law, passed by the city council in July and revised in September, is seen as a template for similar laws passed by 10 other towns around the country, according to the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, one of the groups that has joined in a lawsuit challenging the measure.

Thirty-two towns are considering similar measures



[Oh, if this is a dupe, I didn't see the origional.]

I'm waiting for some city or state to tell a judge to stuff it. Judges rule because people let them.

Your not protected under our Constitution unless you are a LEGAL immigrant, I could care less if it costs those POS cocksuckers "irreparable injury"

Quoted: Judges rule because people let them.

. . . time to vote from the roof tops???

Quoted: I'm waiting for some city or state to tell a judge to stuff it. Judges rule because people let them.

+1000

Quoted: Quoted: Judges rule because people let them. . . . time to vote from the roof tops???

My ballots are printed by Federal. How about yours?

His superior court will act RAPIDLY to overturn him.   I think he'll be flipped within a week.


They're ILLEGAL immigrants.  They are TRESPASSERS.   They are ALREADY breaking the law by being here.    An ordinance that helps to ensure that existing laws are actually enforced will survive a court challenge,   if the judge isn't an activist asshole.


CJ

It is beyond imagination how things like this can even get to this point.  

At times like this you just wanna say  "does Wayne Brady gotta choke-a-bitch"?!?!!?!?!

You know.. i just dont get it.

ILLEGAL

What is it that people do not understand about that word?  Why is this such a difficult subject to break through.  AHHHRGH!!  Makes me so angry.

What's everyone so upset about?  The judge's position is the same as George W. Bush's, right?

i wonder how much longer a small town of 10,000 can survive with an illegal population of 25%. somehow, i suspect they are not producing a large financial surplus.

Quoted: Your not protected under our Constitution unless you are a LEGAL immigrant, I could care less if it costs those POS cocksuckers "irreparable injury"

sorry, but no.  the Constitution applies to EVERYONE in the US regardless of immigration status...as it should be.  These are God given rights and I doubt He gives a shit about a Green Card

Quoted: Quoted: Your not protected under our Constitution unless you are a LEGAL immigrant, I could care less if it costs those POS cocksuckers "irreparable injury" sorry, but no.  the Constitution applies to EVERYONE in the US regardless of immigration status...as it should be.  These are God given rights and I doubt He gives a shit about a Green Card

The Constitution doesnt say SHIT about the right of an illegal to have a place to stay, so as I see it he is in NOT protected by our constitution, other than freedom of speech/religion etc;

They areILLEGALy here and have nothing but contempt for our laws.

They have no protection to any of the issues covered by the PA law, they are in violation of the law and should be treated as such

Fuck no our constitution backs us up when we're lucky!!!!They are not here LEGALLY!!! they are wrong from the get go,this judge is a piece of shit,that is the bottom line.These people don't want to be americans,don't try to be americans,and do ther best to make our country even more corrupt,greedy,and generally filthy just like their home country,if you want to know how they vote,look south.Deport every freaking one of them and thier anchor babies,we'll be better off for it!!!

Tell the mayor you support  him .......http://www.hazletoncity.org/home_frameset.htm.....Go to "A open Letter" then go to the link at bottom of page. I sent him a "I support you" type message.

Another cocksucker liberal activist judge.
Elected or appointed?
This has got to stop.
My blood pressure keeps going up.
The eminent domain ruling by SCOTUS made me puke, now this.
Why dont we just hand over everyhting we own to the illegals?

Quoted: sorry, but no.  the Constitution applies to EVERYONE in the US regardless of immigration status...as it should be.  These are God given rights and I doubt He gives a shit about a Green Card

                                                       


The Constitution of the UNITED STATES applies to AMERICANS!!!  Period!!!  

I'll refrain from any other comments!

ya know.  It's times like this when a court blatantly disregards common sense, the law, and the will of US CITIZENS, that people get the irresistible urge to riot and burn a F-ing courthouse down!    

Of course I'm not advocating that because that probably violates the CoC.  That's what would have happened in the past, but now it's dangerous to even talk about it.    

Quoted: Quoted: Your not protected under our Constitution unless you are a LEGAL immigrant, I could care less if it costs those POS cocksuckers "irreparable injury" sorry, but no.  the Constitution applies to EVERYONE in the US regardless of immigration status...as it should be.  These are God given rights and I doubt He gives a shit about a Green Card

No, it is for AMERICANS!!!!!

Quoted: Quoted: sorry, but no.  the Constitution applies to EVERYONE in the US regardless of immigration status...as it should be.  These are God given rights and I doubt He gives a shit about a Green Card                                                         The Constitution of the UNITED STATES applies to AMERICANS!!!  Period!!!   I'll refrain from any other comments!

"We the People" means "We the Citizens?"  Constitutional protections have always applied to persons on US soil.  Does a Canadian have the right to free speech while he is here?  Of course.  Does an American in Iran have the right to free speech?  Nope...

Quoted: What's everyone so upset about?  The judge's position is the same as George W. Bush's, right?

It's all bush's fault.  

Quoted: ya know.  It's times like this when a court blatantly disregards common sense, the law, and the will of US CITIZENS, that people get the irresistible urge to riot and burn a F-ing courthouse down!     Of course I'm not advocating that because that probably violates the CoC.  That's what would have happened in the past, but now it's dangerous to even talk about it.

One thing I was taught in schools that has always stuck with me is "The will of the majority shall not infringe on the rights of the minority."

If this decision ISNT overturned you can kiss this country goodbye. Founding Fathers would have three words of advice-"Lock and Load"

Quoted: Quoted: ya know.  It's times like this when a court blatantly disregards common sense, the law, and the will of US CITIZENS, that people get the irresistible urge to riot and burn a F-ing courthouse down!     Of course I'm not advocating that because that probably violates the CoC.  That's what would have happened in the past, but now it's dangerous to even talk about it.     One thing I was taught in schools that has always stuck with me is "The will of the majority shall not infringe on the rights of the minority."

Does the term ILLEGAL mean anything to you?

They should be treated just as any other invader of our country should be treated.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: ya know.  It's times like this when a court blatantly disregards common sense, the law, and the will of US CITIZENS, that people get the irresistible urge to riot and burn a F-ing courthouse down!     Of course I'm not advocating that because that probably violates the CoC.  That's what would have happened in the past, but now it's dangerous to even talk about it.     One thing I was taught in schools that has always stuck with me is "The will of the majority shall not infringe on the rights of the minority." Does the term ILLEGAL mean anything to you? They should be treated just as any other invader of our country should be treated.

Maybe it means to him more than we catch on and that is why his answers seem to lean that direction.

I'm calling the I.N.S.

Quoted: Quick call I.N.S.

Should be Immigration and Neutralization Service, as in neutralizing the problem

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: ya know.  It's times like this when a court blatantly disregards common sense, the law, and the will of US CITIZENS, that people get the irresistible urge to riot and burn a F-ing courthouse down!     Of course I'm not advocating that because that probably violates the CoC.  That's what would have happened in the past, but now it's dangerous to even talk about it.     One thing I was taught in schools that has always stuck with me is "The will of the majority shall not infringe on the rights of the minority." Does the term ILLEGAL mean anything to you? They should be treated just as any other invader of our country should be treated. Maybe it means to him more than we catch on and that is why his answers seem to lean that direction.

Hardly.  I'm just saying that the Constitution has never been restricted to citizens only.  When someone sets foot here (legally or illegally) it applies to them.  If an American travels to another country, the Constitution does not follow him...

Quoted: Quoted: What's everyone so upset about?  The judge's position is the same as George W. Bush's, right? It's all bush's fault.

Actually, telling the INS to "park the trucks" was Bush's fault, as was his amnesty plan, as was his pandering to Fox, as was his attempt to force the House to knuckle under to the Bush/Kennedy bill ...

I believe the issue of contention in regard to illegals possessing rights under the constitution stems from a 1982 SCOTUS ruling on an interpretation of the 14th Amendment, also known as the "Equal Protection Clause".

Section 1 of the 14th Amendment reads: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. (I listed the "important part" underlined as the following SCOTUS ruling hinges on that line)

The Supreme Court ruled that equal protection applies to persons that are “illegal aliens” in Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, 210 -16 (1982) (explicating meaning of the phrase in the context of holding that aliens illegally present in a State are ‘’within its jurisdiction’’ and may thus raise equal protection claims).

By my understanding a "due process of law" can revoke the legal standing of illegal immigrants and "deprive them of life, liberty or property". I would believe that "due process of law", if enacted by a legal body capable of creating such law, would be binding and as such enforcible within the bounds of the Constitution.

Then again this is simply my personal interpretation of the SCOTUS'es interpretation of two sentences of the 14th Amendment, an Amendment drafted after the Civil War to assure that newly emancipated black slaves would never be denied citizenship by the States. I bet the drafters' intent was not that it would be used to circumvent our immigration laws... then again this is all my interpretation and I'm no lawyer.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: ya know.  It's times like this when a court blatantly disregards common sense, the law, and the will of US CITIZENS, that people get the irresistible urge to riot and burn a F-ing courthouse down!     Of course I'm not advocating that because that probably violates the CoC.  That's what would have happened in the past, but now it's dangerous to even talk about it.     One thing I was taught in schools that has always stuck with me is "The will of the majority shall not infringe on the rights of the minority." Does the term ILLEGAL mean anything to you? They should be treated just as any other invader of our country should be treated. Maybe it means to him more than we catch on and that is why his answers seem to lean that direction. Hardly.  I'm just saying that the Constitution has never been restricted to citizens only.  When someone sets foot here (legally or illegally) it applies to them.  If an American travels to another country, the Constitution does not follow him...

For two hundred years the Constitution DID just apply to US citizens until some federal judge decided to use some LIBERAL logic and interpret it to apply to everybody that can crash there way into the country.  
This is the amendment that judge used to pervert the constitution.
14th amendment is as follows:
Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The original intent of the 14th amendment was to prevent states from denying citizenship to newly freed slaves. Nothing wrong about that but it was NEVER meant to apply to illegal invaders.

We should back the mayor up with some kind of mail in type deal. What sounds good?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: ya know.  It's times like this when a court blatantly disregards common sense, the law, and the will of US CITIZENS, that people get the irresistible urge to riot and burn a F-ing courthouse down!     Of course I'm not advocating that because that probably violates the CoC.  That's what would have happened in the past, but now it's dangerous to even talk about it.     One thing I was taught in schools that has always stuck with me is "The will of the majority shall not infringe on the rights of the minority." Does the term ILLEGAL mean anything to you? They should be treated just as any other invader of our country should be treated. Maybe it means to him more than we catch on and that is why his answers seem to lean that direction.

Hardly.  I'm just saying that the Constitution has never been restricted to citizens only.  When someone sets foot here (legally or illegally) it applies to them. If an American travels to another country, the Constitution does not follow him...

Right, we have to abide by the LAWS of the country that we go to.

So, ILLEGALS are BREAKING OUR LAWS and should be expelled from our country!

I mean, they dont get to take Mexican or Gautemalan law with them, do they?

Your first clue should be that our Supreme joke,err I mean court,has in a few past disscussions started bringing up case law from forieghn countries as examples for reading our laws!!!

How anyone can condemn this Act is beyond me.

Here is the Hazleton Illegal Immigrant Relief Act:


ORDINANCE 2006-18
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION RELIEF ACT ORDINANCE

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HAZLETON AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. TITLE
This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the “City of Hazleton Illegal Immigration Relief
Act Ordinance.”
SECTION 2. FINDINGS AND DECLARATION OF PURPOSE

The People of the City of Hazleton find and declare:
A. That state and federal law require that certain conditions be met before a person
may be authorized to work or reside in this country.

B. That unlawful workers and illegal aliens, as defined by this ordinance and state
and federal law, do not normally meet such conditions as a matter of law when
present in the City of Hazleton.

C. That unlawful employment, the harboring of illegal aliens in dwelling units in the
City of Hazleton, and crime committed by illegal aliens harm the health, safety
and welfare of authorized US workers and legal residents in the City of Hazleton.
Illegal immigration leads to higher crime rates, subjects our hospitals to fiscal
hardship and legal residents to substandard quality of care, contributes to other
burdens on public services, increasing their cost and diminishing their
availability to legal residents, and diminishes our overall quality of life.

D. That the City of Hazleton is authorized to abate public nuisances and empowered
and mandated by the people of Hazleton to abate the nuisance of illegal
immigration by diligently prohibiting the acts and policies that facilitate illegal
immigration in a manner consistent with federal law and the objectives of
Congress.

E. That United States Code Title 8, subsection 1324(a)(1)(A) prohibits the harboring
of illegal aliens. The provision of housing to illegal aliens is a fundamental
component of harboring.

F. This ordinance seeks to secure to those lawfully present in the United States and
this City, whether or not they are citizens of the United States, the right to live in
peace free of the threat crime, to enjoy the public services provided by this city
without being burdened by the cost of providing goods, support and services to
aliens unlawfully present in the United States, and to be free of the debilitating
effects on their economic and social well being imposed by the influx of illegal
aliens to the fullest extent that these goals can be achieved consistent with the
Constitution and Laws of the United States and the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania.

G. The City shall not construe this ordinance to prohibit the rendering of emergency
medical care, emergency assistance, or legal assistance to any person.

SECTION 3. DEFINITIONS
When used in this chapter, the following words, terms and phrases shall have the meanings
ascribed to them herein, and shall be construed so as to be consistent with state and federal law,
including federal immigration law:

A. “Business entity” means any person or group of persons performing or engaging
in any activity, enterprise, profession, or occupation for gain, benefit, advantage,
or livelihood, whether for profit or not for profit.

(1) The term business entity shall include but not be limited to self-employed
individuals, partnerships, corporations, contractors, and subcontractors.

(2) The term business entity shall include any business entity that possesses a
business permit, any business entity that is exempt by law from obtaining
such a business permit, and any business entity that is operating
unlawfully without such a business permit.

B. “City” means the City of Hazleton.

C. “Contractor” means a person, employer, subcontractor or business entity that
enters into an agreement to perform any service or work or to provide a certain
product in exchange for valuable consideration. This definition shall include but
not be limited to a subcontractor, contract employee, or a recruiting or staffing
entity.

D. “Illegal Alien” means an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States,
according to the terms of United States Code Title 8, section 1101 et seq. The
City shall not conclude that a person is an illegal alien unless and until an
authorized representative of the City has verified with the federal government,
pursuant to United States Code Title 8, subsection 1373(c), that the person is an
alien who is not lawfully present in the United States.

E. “Unlawful worker” means a person who does not have the legal right or
authorization to work due to an impediment in any provision of federal, state or
local law, including but not limited to a minor disqualified by nonage, or an
unauthorized alien as defined by United States Code Title 8, subsection
1324a(h)(3).

F. “Work” means any job, task, employment, labor, personal services, or any other
activity for which compensation is provided, expected, or due, including but not
limited to all activities conducted by business entities.

G. “Basic Pilot Program” means the electronic verification of work authorization
program of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act of
1996, P.L. 104-208, Division C, Section 403(a); United States Code Title 8,
subsection 1324a, and operated by the United States Department of Homeland
Security (or a successor program established by the federal government.)

SECTION 4. BUSINESS PERMITS, CONTRACTS, OR GRANTS

A. It is unlawful for any business entity to recruit, hire for employment, or continue to
employ, or to permit, dispatch, or instruct any person who is an unlawful worker to
perform work in whole or part within the City. Every business entity that applies for a
business permit to engage in any type of work in the City shall sign an affidavit, prepared
by the City Solicitor, affirming that they do not knowingly utilize the services or hire any
person who is an unlawful worker.

B. Enforcement: The Hazleton Code Enforcement Office shall enforce the requirements of
this section.

(1) An enforcement action shall be initiated by means of a written signed complaint
to the Hazleton Code Enforcement Office submitted by any City official, business
entity, or City resident. A valid complaint shall include an allegation which
describes the alleged violator(s) as well as the actions constituting the violation,
and the date and location where such actions occurred.

(2) A complaint which alleges a violation solely or primarily on the basis of national
origin, ethnicity, or race shall be deemed invalid and shall not be enforced.

(3) Upon receipt of a valid complaint, the Hazleton Code Enforcement Office shall,
within three business days, request identity information from the business entity
regarding any persons alleged to be unlawful workers. The Hazleton Code
Enforcement Office shall suspend the business permit of any business entity which
fails, within three business days after receipt of the request, to provide such
information. In instances where an unlawful worker is alleged to be an
unauthorized alien, as defined in United States Code Title 8, subsection
1324a(h)(3), the Hazleton Code Enforcement Office shall submit identity data
required by the federal government to verify, pursuant to United States Code Title
8, section 1373, the immigration status of such person(s), and shall provide the
business entity with written confirmation of that verification.

(4) The Hazleton Code Enforcement Office shall suspend the business permit of any
business entity which fails correct a violation of this section within three business
days after notification of the violation by the Hazleton Code Enforcement Office.

(5) The Hazleton Code Enforcement Office shall not suspend the business permit of a
business entity if, prior to the date of the violation, the business entity had verified
the work authorization of the alleged unlawful worker(s) using the Basic Pilot
Program.

(6) The suspension shall terminate one business day after a legal representative of
the business entity submits, at a City office designated by the City Solicitor, a
sworn affidavit stating that the violation has ended.

(a) The affidavit shall include a description of the specific measures and
actions taken by the business entity to end the violation, and shall include
the name, address and other adequate identifying information of the
unlawful workers related to the complaint.

(b) Where two or more of the unlawful workers were verified by the federal
government to be unauthorized aliens, the legal representative of the
business entity shall submit to the Hazleton Code Enforcement Office, in
addition to the prescribed affidavit, documentation acceptable to the City
Solicitor which confirms that the business entity has enrolled in and will
participate in the Basic Pilot Program for the duration of the validity of
the business permit granted to the business entity.

(7) For a second or subsequent violation, the Hazleton Code Enforcement Office
shall suspend the business permit of a business entity for a period of twenty days.
After the end of the suspension period, and upon receipt of the prescribed
affidavit, the Hazleton Code Enforcement Office shall reinstate the business
permit. The Hazleton Code Enforcement Office shall forward the affidavit,
complaint, and associated documents to the appropriate federal enforcement
agency, pursuant to United States Code Title 8, section 1373. In the case of an
unlawful worker disqualified by state law not related to immigration, the Hazleton
Code Enforcement Office shall forward the affidavit, complaint, and associated
documents to the appropriate state enforcement agency.

C. All agencies of the City shall enroll and participate in the Basic Pilot Program.

D. As a condition for the award of any City contract or grant to a business entity for which
the value of employment, labor or, personal services shall exceed $10,000, the business
entity shall provide documentation confirming its enrollment and participation in the
Basic Pilot Program.

E. Private Cause of Action for Unfairly Discharged Employees

(1) The discharge of any employee who is not an unlawful worker by a business entity
in the City is an unfair business practice if, on the date of the discharge, the
business entity was not participating in the Basic Pilot program and the business
entity was employing an unlawful worker.

(2) The discharged worker shall have a private cause of action in the Municipal
Court of Hazleton against the business entity for the unfair business practice. The
business entity found to have violated this subsection shall be liable to the
aggrieved employee for:

(a) three times the actual damages sustained by the employee, including but
not limited to lost wages or compensation from the date of the discharge
until the date the employee has procured new employment at an equivalent
rate of compensation, up to a period of one hundred and twenty days; and

(b) reasonable attorney’s fees and costs.

SECTION 5. HARBORING ILLEGAL ALIENS

A. It is unlawful for any person or business entity that owns a dwelling unit in the City to
harbor an illegal alien in the dwelling unit, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact
that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law,
unless such harboring is otherwise expressly permitted by federal law.

(1) For the purposes of this section, to let, lease, or rent a dwelling unit to an illegal
alien, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to,
entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, shall be deemed to
constitute harboring. To suffer or permit the occupancy of the dwelling unit by an
illegal alien, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come
to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, shall also be
deemed to constitute harboring.

(2) A separate violation shall be deemed to have been committed on each day that
such harboring occurs, and for each adult illegal alien harbored in the dwelling
unit, beginning one business day after receipt of a notice of violation from the
Hazleton Code Enforcement Office.

(3) A separate violation of this section shall be deemed to have been committed for
each business day on which the owner fails to provide the Hazleton Code
Enforcement Office with identity data needed to obtain a federal verification of
immigration status, beginning three days after the owner receives written notice
from the Hazleton Code Enforcement Office.

B. Enforcement: The Hazleton Code Enforcement Office shall enforce the requirements of
this section.

(1) An enforcement action shall be initiated by means of a written signed complaint
to the Hazleton Code Enforcement Office submitted by any official, business
entity, or resident of the City. A valid complaint shall include an allegation which
describes the alleged violator(s) as well as the actions constituting the violation,
and the date and location where such actions occurred.

(2) A complaint which alleges a violation solely or primarily on the basis of national
origin, ethnicity, or race shall be deemed invalid and shall not be enforced.

(3) Upon receipt of a valid written complaint, the Hazleton Code Enforcement Office
shall, pursuant to United States Code Title 8, section 1373(c), verify with the
federal government the immigration status of a person seeking to use, occupy,
lease, or rent a dwelling unit in the City. The Hazleton Code Enforcement Office
shall submit identity data required by the federal government to verify
immigration status. The City shall forward identity data provided by the owner to
the federal government, and shall provide the property owner with written
confirmation of that verification.

(4) If after five business days following receipt of written notice from the City that a
violation has occurred and that the immigration status of any alleged illegal alien
has been verified, pursuant to United States Code Title 8, section 1373(c), the
owner of the dwelling unit fails to correct a violation of this section, the Hazleton
Code Enforcement Office shall deny or suspend the rental license of the dwelling
unit.

(5) For the period of suspension, the owner of the dwelling unit shall not be permitted
to collect any rent, payment, fee, or any other form of compensation from, or on
behalf of, any tenant or occupant in the dwelling unit.

(6) The denial or suspension shall terminate one business day after a legal
representative of the dwelling unit owner submits to the Hazleton Code
Enforcement Office a sworn affidavit stating that each and every violation has
ended. The affidavit shall include a description of the specific measures and
actions taken by the business entity to end the violation, and shall include the
name, address and other adequate identifying information for the illegal aliens
who were the subject of the complaint.

(7) The Hazleton Code Enforcement Office shall forward the affidavit, complaint, and
associated documents to the appropriate federal enforcement agency, pursuant to
United States Code Title 8, section 1373.

(8) Any dwelling unit owner who commits a second or subsequent violation of this
section shall be subject to a fine of two hundred and fifty dollars ($250) for each
separate violation. The suspension provisions of this section applicable to a first
violation shall also apply.

(9) Upon the request of a dwelling unit owner, the Hazleton Code Enforcement Office
shall, pursuant to United States Code Title 8, section 1373(c), verify with the
federal government the lawful immigration status of a person seeking to use,
occupy, lease, or rent a dwelling unit in the City. The penalties in this section
shall not apply in the case of dwelling unit occupants whose status as an alien
lawfully present in the United States has been verified.

SECTION 6. CONSTRUCTION AND SEVERABILITY

A. The requirements and obligations of this section shall be implemented in a manner fully
consistent with federal law regulating immigration and protecting the civil rights of all
citizens and aliens.

B. If any part of provision of this Chapter is in conflict or inconsistent with applicable
provisions of federal or state statutes, or is otherwise held to be invalid or unenforceable
by any court of competent jurisdiction, such part of provision shall be suspended and
superseded by such applicable laws or regulations, and the remainder of this Chapter
shall not be affected thereby.

ORDAINED by Council this __________ day of September, 2006.
First Reading Second Reading Third Reading
(September 8, 2006)
Presented Presented Presented
Seconded Seconded Seconded
Gabos Gabos Gabos
Graham Graham Graham
Mundie Mundie Mundie
Nilles Nilles Nilles
Yannuzzi Yannuzzi Yannuzzi

I just love how people from both ends of the spectrum start calling a judge an activist if the ruling isn't what THEY believe.

Quoted: i wonder how much longer a small town of 10,000 can survive with an illegal population of 25%. somehow, i suspect they are not producing a large financial surplus.

And if they are a good bit of it is wired out of the country. Dust off your old Econ book and check out the section on the velocity of money.

I say run that fucking judge out of town, but before that tar and feather his ass.

Quoted: I just love how people from both ends of the spectrum start calling a judge an activist if the ruling isn't what THEY believe.

So you think that illegals have rights to be here?...Illegally?

Last I knew, it was still against the law to aid someone committing a felony.  To bad it is not econimically detromental yet.

Quoted: Quoted: I just love how people from both ends of the spectrum start calling a judge an activist if the ruling isn't what THEY believe. So you think that illegals have rights to be here?...Illegally?

Thats not what I said...do they have rights? Yes, we all have rights. I just think its odd that both sides accuse judges of being activists as soon as they don't agree with the decision handed down. The judge has ordered a stay on the local law, not a verdict.I predict that ultimately the town will lose because immigration laws fall under the purvue of the national government, not local governments.

Quoted: Quoted: ya know.  It's times like this when a court blatantly disregards common sense, the law, and the will of US CITIZENS, that people get the irresistible urge to riot and burn a F-ing courthouse down!     Of course I'm not advocating that because that probably violates the CoC.  That's what would have happened in the past, but now it's dangerous to even talk about it.     One thing I was taught in schools that has always stuck with me is "The will of the majority shall not infringe on the rights of the minority."

You forgot about the part that they have no right to be here dude. They are citizens of another country tresspassing in this country and are by law supposed to be deported.

What right do they have to be here again?

holee smokes, I've never seen such widespread misapprehension regarding the scope of the Constitution's protections. Having been here awhile, that's saying a lot!

Quoted: I just love how people from both ends of the spectrum start calling a judge an activist if the ruling isn't what THEY believe.

My graduate thesis paper for seminar addressed precisely this point.

Quoted: holee smokes, I've never seen such widespread misapprehension regarding the scope of the Constitution's protections. Having been here awhile, that's saying a lot!

Care to elaborate?

I have a real simple solution to the problem.  Shoot every single one that is confirmed an illegal alien, shoot them as they come across the border, I don't care if they are man woman, or child (well, not the child, but don't let them across, they'll probably run after daddy has been shot anyways).

I'm tired of the fact that every single freaking prek school I look at to put my daughter in (which I will pay for out of my pocket) has a MANDATORY spanish class, which as I understand is mandated by the state of Texas.  I'm tired of seeing spanish billboard signs when I drive down the highway, I'm tired of hearing, for english press 1 and for spanish press 2.  I'm tired of having to foot the bill for welfare and for public schools that use my money to teach the children of people who are only here because their parents committed a felony.  I'm tired of having this issue brought up and talked about by everyone that I know, and the federal government that is supposed to be OUR government for us and by us, getting in bed with the government of another country and giving their poor my money that should be going to my kids.  I don't give a flying shit about political correctness or compassion.  My state is being over run as is my whole fucking country and no one wants to do a damn thing about it in the government.  They encourage it and say it's going to help stop it.  Bull shit x 999999999999999  I'm fed up with it.  Anyone disagrees?  I don't give a flip.  Take your disagreement elsewhere and shove it up your ass.

come on 45ACP_Marine, tell us how you really feel.


I am fairly pissed at the situation myself.