Posted on 12/18/2007 11:55:54 PM PST by flattorney
TULSA — U.S. District Judge James Payne, in a very strongly worded opinion, dismissed a lawsuit against Oklahoma's controversial immigration bill, House Bill 1804, Wednesday evening (Dec 12th).
Payne found that half the complainants lacked standing and said those with standing — a handful of "illegal alien complainants” — were attempting to use the court to openly violate federal law. Payne questioned the validity of plaintiffs identified anonymously as John and Jane Doe. He wrote that “these plaintiffs admit their violation of federal law and then ask this court to allow them to file suit anonymously, so as to avoid detection by the federal law enforcement agencies tasked with investigating immigration violations." “These illegal alien plaintiffs seek nothing more than to use this court as a vehicle for their continued unlawful presence in this country. To allow these plaintiffs to do so would make this court an abettor of iniquity and this court finds that simply unpalatable.” “Some plaintiffs ignore the need to describe the injuries actually caused by the challenged statutes, while the illegal alien plaintiffs complain of grievances that could best be remedied by simply compliance with federal law," Payne wrote. (Compliance = either leave the Country or become legal citizen. - TAB)
Payne remarked that his ruling might have been different had the plaintiffs been children whose unlawful presence in this country was involuntary. The lawsuit was filed in early September by the Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders, two restaurants, two churches, a construction company and a half dozen Jane and John Doe defendants. The suit questioned the constitutionality of the law, arguing that Oklahoma was treading into federal territory.
Author declares victory - - Bill author Rep. Randy Terrill, R-Moore, lauded the decision as a great victory. "It has been my position all along that House Bill 1804 would withstand any legal challenge brought against it. The judge's decision to dismiss the case again vindicates that view,” Terrill said. "House Bill 1804 is a very carefully calibrated measure designed to sync perfectly with federal immigration law and not exceed the scope of state authority in this matter.” Opponents of HB 1804 tried to accomplish through the legal process what they could not accomplish through the legislative process. "Thankfully, they have failed,” he added.
In Tulsa, Guillermo Rojas, a Hispanic businessman and member of the Governor's Advisory Council on Hispanic and Latino Affairs, continued to decry the law as racist and politically motivated. "I am very disappointed. Everybody knows the law is affecting the state's economy, and it's not positive under any circumstances,” Rojas said. "I believe this law was inspired by racism and politics. And there's no reason to obey this law, especially when they try to criminalize the undocumented people, no one is going to obey that law. I am not going to.” Hispanic people have been manipulated by politicians for the last few years over immigration, Rojas said. They were manipulated when Congress failed to pass comprehensive immigration reform. They were then again used by Terrill when he devised a way to rise up the Republican hierarchy, he said. "We are sick and tired of being treated like second-class citizens and being used by the politicians. That's going to change for sure, no matter what,” Rojas said. "If we are not going to win this battle, in the next election we will win the war. The Hispanic vote is going to be very important for any candidate.” Rojas said Hispanic community leaders have been working hard to help undocumented people become legal and register to vote. He hopes that work will pay off during the next election cycle.
Payne initially dismissed the lawsuit filed by the National Coalition of Latino Clergy in October because the plaintiffs couldn't show that the law had damaged them before it took effect. However, he left open the possibility that an individual plaintiff could have standing if actual damages could be shown. The group named Gov. Brad Henry and Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson in the filing, which seeks damages because of House Bill 1804, which went into effect Nov. 1. Among other things, the new law makes it illegal to knowingly transport illegal immigrants, creates barriers to hiring illegal immigrants and requires proof of citizenship to receive certain government benefits. After yesterday’s second defeat. Rev. Miguel Rivera, president of the National Coalition of Latino Clergy, said the group will either seek a rehearing of the case in U.S. District Court in Tulsa or appeal directly to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver.
Ira Mehlman, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform — a national group responsible for crafting much of Oklahoma's statute as well as numerous others around the nation — rejects the notion that the law is either racist or unkind. "When an illegal alien makes a decision to come here, they are acting completely for self interest. It's perfectly legitimate for an American to say that doesn't serve our interest,” Mehlman said.
Additional detailed discussion and references are located on FlAttorney's FR "Straight Talk" page
Posted for FlAttorney by TAB
Tulsa World article with over 200 readers feedback comments.
FlAttorney says: Some real gems in the legal document and TW readers feedback comments
The federal law is written to encourage states to assist in enforcement. Any judge who is following the law of this land would have to uphold HB 1804. <> From the "Summary of Federal Immigration and Nationality Act Section 8 USC 1324" - - State and local law enforcement officials have the general power to investigate and arrest violators of federal immigration statutes without prior INS knowledge or approval, as long as they are authorized to do so by state law. There is no extant federal limitation on this authority. The 1996 immigration control legislation passed by Congress was intended to encourage states and local agencies to participate in the process of enforcing federal immigration laws. Immigration officers and local law enforcement officers may detain an individual for a brief warrantless interrogation where circumstances create a reasonable suspicion that the individual is illegally present in the U.S. Specific facts constituting a reasonable suspicion include evasive, nervous, or erratic behavior; dress or speech indicating foreign citizenship; and presence in an area known to contain a concentration of illegal aliens. Hispanic appearance alone is not sufficient. Immigration officers and police must have a valid warrant or valid employer's consent to enter workplaces or residences. Any vehicle used to transport or harbor illegal aliens, or used as a substantial part of an activity that encourages illegal aliens to come to or reside in the U.S. may be seized by an immigration officer and is subject to forfeiture. The forfeiture power covers any conveyances used within the U.S.
Posted for FlAttorney by TAB
[SNIP]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: Tonight, individual states, Oklahoma, Arizona and Virginia each taking action to deal with the crisis caused by illegal immigration. These states like many others forced to find solutions because of the federal government's refusal to solve this crisis.
IN OKLAHOMA, A CHALLENGE TO THAT STATE'S GOVERNMENT NEW LAW WAS DISMISSED BY A FEDERAL JUDGE. BILL TUCKER HAS OUR REPORT.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The lawsuit challenging Oklahoma's crackdown on illegal aliens was dismissed for a very simple reason. The plaintiffs are illegal aliens. In legal terms they lack standing. In his ruling Judge James Payne of the U.S. District Court for Oklahoma writes, "The court is convinced that the proper remedy for the injuries alleged by the remaining plaintiffs, all of whom were in violation of federal immigration is not judicial intervention, rather, simple compliance with federal immigration law." In other words, the plaintiffs don't need the court to grant them relief. All they have to do is leave the country or go through the process of becoming legal.
Judge Payne also was clearly troubled that the plaintiffs, because of their admitted unlawful status wanted to sue anonymously. Quote, "These illegal alien plaintiffs seek nothing more than to use this court as a vehicle for their continued unlawful presence in this country." It's an observation that pleased supporters of the legislation.
KRIS KOBACH, IMMIGRATION REFORM LAW INSTITUTE: This judge correctly recognized that if a federal court gives that anonymity to these illegal alien plaintiffs then the federal court is stopping federal law enforcement officers from figuring out who these people are. And he said that is not the proper role of a federal judge to assist you in violating federal law.
TUCKER: Judge Payne admits in his ruling that if the plaintiffs had been illegal alien children, whose presence here is involuntary, he might have reached a different conclusion.
The National Coalition of Latino Clergy, who were the lead party in the suit say there will be an appeal and the fight is far from over.
REV. MIGUEL RIVERA, NATIONAL COALITION OF LATINO CLERGY: And yes, we're going to continue fighting this fight against HB 1804 in Oklahoma.
TUCKER: The ruling by Judge Payne in the Northern District Court of Oklahoma stands in sharp contrast to the ruling by a federal judge in the Hazelton, Pennsylvania, case.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
TUCKER (on camera): In the Hazleton case the judge pointedly allowed illegal aliens to sue the city. He, in fact, directed the court to protect their identity, even from the lawyers for Hazelton of knowing the identity of those illegal aliens who were suing him. That case is currently on appeal. Kobach, who we just heard from in the piece, Lou, is of course the lead attorney in Hazelton's defense.
DOBBS: Well, that's an amazing statement by the federal judge, Judge Payne saying the problem here is that you're in this country illegally and you have two solutions that are both perfectly reasonable remedies, either leave the country or become citizens.
TUCKER: Well, exactly. He said I can't grant you any relief because at the end of the day, even if I rule in your favor, you're still in violation of federal immigration law and I can't fix that. Only you can.
DOBBS: Who -- I have to say it, who would have guessed that there is a federal judge anywhere in this country that had that kind of intelligence and common sense and the courage to speak straightforwardly about a reasonable response to this issue?
TUCKER: It is a very interesting ruling and I am sure we're going -- it's going to have much bigger impact than just this case.
DOBBS: Absolutely, thank you very much. Bill Tucker.
[SNIP]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) (Towards end of broadcast)
DOBBS: On a personal note I can't tell you how excited and happy I am that we were able to report to you tonight that a federal judge has actually employing good, old American common sense, straight forward honesty and reason in applying U.S. law. The very idea that a federal judge would rule that an illegal alien has two choices rather than suing the U.S. government, that is, either leave this country in which he or she is in illegally or to seek citizenship. That just excites me. I hope it pleases you as much as it does me.
[INSERT SNIP]
DOBBS: Let's turn to our poll tonight. The poll tonight question is, "Do you think it is reasonable and appropriate for American citizens to expect that local, state and federal governments work together to enforce all U.S. laws including immigration laws? Cast your vote at loudobbs.com. We'd love to hear from you on this. Well, bring the results later here to you.
[SNIP] (end of broadcast)
DOBBS: (End of Program) The results of our poll, 98 percent of you responding that it is reasonable and appropriate for American citizens to expect that local state and federal governments will work together to enforce all of U.S. laws including immigration. How about that?
Posted for FlAttorney by TAB
2Jedismom, Please Oklahoma Ping thread. Thank you in advance - TAB
Then Rojas can grab his pals - jump the fence - and get the f*** out.
Outta throw the lawyers for these illegals into jail.
My sis lives in Oklahoma and she was telling me that the illegals are LEAVING because they have made it so hot for them there. Good for them - we would be wise to repeat in other states.
Rep. Randy Terrill, R-Moore has a bright future.
Cutting to the chase - - no, this judge was NOT another corrupt Clinton scumbag.
(”It’s the judges, stupid.”)
Payne, James H.
Born 1941 in Lubbock, TX
Federal Judicial Service:
Judge, U. S. District Court, Western District of Oklahoma
Nominated by George W. Bush on September 4, 2001, to a seat vacated by Billy Michael Burrage; Confirmed by the Senate on October 23, 2001, and received commission on October 24, 2001.
Does the Governor also have an "Advisory Council on Caucasian and English Speaking Citizens Affairs"? Probably not.
The problem here, of course, is that the judge seems to be telling the scumbags to go round up a few children and file a new suit on their behalf. It would have been far better for the judge to make his ruling and then keep his mouth shut.
It has two of the best members of the U.S. Senate, and a very good legislature, judging by this law.
On to Arizona.
Payne found that half the complainants lacked standing and said those with standing — a handful of “illegal alien complainants” — were attempting to use the court to openly violate federal law....
good on OK and good on the Judge...fianlly a state and judge with common sense....
just wonder when all the illegals will make their way up to the peoples’ republic of NJ....after all ~ corslime & the lib/dems welcome them with open arms and cannot wait to give them more benefits with hardworking taxpayer dollars!!!
A common liberal tactic.
"Payne found that half the complainants lacked standing and said those with standing — a handful of "illegal alien complainants” — were attempting to use the court to openly violate federal law"
Interesting and unusual that a judge would so blatantly uphold the LAW in this day and age when the Liberal "right of the unsuccessful" is so in vogue. By Liberal doctrine, the "rights" of any preferred victim group trump any actual laws or standards, because those standards exist primarily to harass and punish the successful.
This just makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
Hopefully you or someone who lives in O.K. will demand one.
Ping.
Love it! Doesn't this loudmouth idiot know Illegals are not even 2nd class citizens - they are not AMERICAN citizens at all.
“Does the Governor also have an “Advisory Council on Caucasian and English Speaking Citizens Affairs”? Probably not”
Sure they do, it’s called the State Department of Revenue. :)
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.