Lechuga v. City Of Hazleton
| Decision Date | 09 September 2010 |
| Docket Number | No. 07-3531.,07-3531. |
| Parties | Pedro LOZANO; Humberto Hernandez; Rosa Lechuga; John Doe 1; John Doe 2; John Doe 3, a Minor, by His parents; Jane Doe 1; Jane Doe 2; Jane Doe 3; John Doe 4, a Minor by His parents, Brenda Lee Mieles; Casa Dominicana of Hazleton, Inc.; Hazleton Hispanic Business Association; Pennsylvania Statewide Latino Coalition; Jane Doe 5; John Doe 7; Jose Luis Lechuga v. CITY OF HAZLETON, Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED.
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED.
Witold J. Walczak, Esq. (ARGUED), American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, PA, Omar Jadwat, Esq. (ARGUED), Lee P. Gelernt, Esq., Jackson Chin, Esq., Foster Maer, Esq., Ghita Schwarz, Esq., Puerto Rican Legal Defense & Education Fund, New York, NY, Jennifer Chang, Esq., Lucas Guttentag, Esq., San Francisco, CA, Thomas B. Fiddler, Esq., White & Williams, Ilan Rosenberg, Esq., Thomas G. Wilkinson, Jr., Esq., Cozen & O'Connor, Philadelphia, PA, Elena Park, Esq., Cozen & O'Connor, West Conshohocken, PA, Shamaine A. Daniels, Esq., Harrisburg, PA, for Plaintiffs-Appellees.
Kris W. Kobach, Esq. (ARGUED), Professor of Law, University of Missouri, Kansas City, MO, Harry G. Mahoney, Esq., Carla P. Maresca, Esq., Andrew B. Adair, Esq., Deasey Mahoney, Valentini & North, Philadelphia, PA, Elizabeth S. Gallaway, Esq., Mountain States Legal Foundation, Lakewood, CO, Michael M. Hethmon, Esq., Immigration Reform Law Institute, Washington, DC, for Defendant-Appellant.
Damon Scott, Florence, SC, Paul J. Orfanedes, Esq., James F. Peterson, Esq., Judicial Watch, Inc., Richard A. Samp, Esq., Washington Legal Foundation, Washington, DC, Andrew L. Schlafly, Esq., New York, NY, for Amicus Appellants.
Robin S. Conrad, Esq., National Chambers Litigation Center, Carter G. Phillips, Esq., Eric A. Shumsky, Esq., Sidley Austin, Kenneth J. Pfaehler, Esq., Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal, John W. West, Esq., Bredhoff & Kaiser, Washington, DC, Burt M. Rublin, Esq., Ballard Spahr, Nancy Winkelman, Esq., Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis, Philadelphia, PA, Diana S. Andsager, Esq., Mayer Brown, Chicago, IL, Charles D. Weisselberg, Esq., Berkley Law School, Berkley, CA, Jacob S. Pultman, Esq., Allen & Overy, Mark D. McPherson, Esq., Morrison & Foerster, New York, NY, for Amicus Appellees.
Before McKEE, Chief Judge, and NYGAARD and SILER, * Circuit Judges.
Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, 205, 102 S.Ct. 2382, 72 L.Ed.2d 786 (1982). The dispute we are now called upon to address is one of an increasing number of cases that have arisen from actions that state and local governments have taken because of illegal immigration.
The City of Hazleton, Pennsylvania (“Hazleton” or the “City”) is appealing a permanent injunction that the district court entered prohibiting Hazleton's enforcement of two local ordinances that attempt to regulate employment of, and provision of rental housing to, certain aliens. Several individuals and organizations sued to enjoin enforcement of the ordinances arguing that they violate the United States Constitution, as well as federal and state statutes. The district court agreed and enjoined Hazleton from enforcing the ordinances in their entirety.
We now hold that the district court erred in reaching the merits of the challenge to the private cause of action provision because no plaintiff has standing to challenge that provision. Accordingly, that portion of the district court's order will be vacated. However, although our reasoning differs somewhat from the analysis used by the district court, we conclude that it correctly enjoined the rest of the challenged ordinances. We will therefore affirm the district court's order in all other respects.
The City of Hazleton is located in Luzerne County in northeastern Pennsylvania. Lozano v. City of Hazleton, 496 F.Supp.2d 477, 484 (M.D.Pa.2007). Under Pennsylvania law, Hazleton is classified as a City of the Third Class and operates under an “Optional Plan B” form of government. Id. Its executive is a mayor, and its legislature is a city council. Id.
Hazleton's population was only 23,000 in 2000. Id. Between 2000 and the time of trial, however, its population increased to between 30,000 and 33,000. Id. Much of this growth was due to an influx of Latino families who migrated from New York and New Jersey to Pennsylvania in the early 2000s. Id. These newcomers included United States citizens and lawful permanent residents, as well as persons lacking lawful immigration status, who are often referred to as “undocumented immigrants” or “illegal aliens.” 1 Id.
Hazleton's mayor, as well as other local officials, subsequently concluded that aliens lacking lawful status were to blame for certain social problems in the City, see J.A. 1672-85, and that the federal government could not be relied upon to prevent such aliens from moving into the City, or to remove them, see Lozano, 496 F.Supp.2d at 522 n. 44. Accordingly, City officials decided to take independent action to regulate the local effects of unlawful immigration. See J.A. 1385, 1486-87. Beginning on July 13, 2006, Hazleton's City Council began enacting a series of ordinances designed to address these concerns. Lozano, 496 F.Supp.2d at 484.
This litigation concerns two of those ordinances: the Illegal Immigration Relief Act Ordinance (“IIRAO”), which consists of Ordinance 2006-18, Ordinance 2006-40 and Ordinance 2007-6; and the Rental Registration Ordinance (“RO”), which...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
EQT Prod. Co. v. Wender
...burden of compliance with a new law generally can constitute an actual injury for standing purposes. See Lozano v. City of Hazleton, 620 F.3d 170, 188–92, 193–94 (3d Cir.2010) (landlord plaintiffs had standing to challenge ordinance requiring proof of legal citizenship from prospective rent......
-
United States v. Alabama
...456 U.S. 305, 312, 102 S.Ct. 1798, 72 L.Ed.2d 91 (1982)).III. FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAW The Third Circuit in Lozano v. City of Hazleton, 620 F.3d 170 (3d Cir.2010), clearly set forth the current federal law regarding immigration and immigrants: 1. The Immigration and Nationality Act The prima......
-
South Carolina v. United States
...of that action would redress the harm it causes—even if it does not eliminate the preexisting risk."); Lozano v. City of Hazleton , 620 F.3d 170, 192 (3d Cir. 2010) ("Redressability ... does not require that a court be able to solve all of a plaintiff's woes. Rather, [it] need only be able ......
-
Asah v. N.J. Dep't of Educ.
...rule they are quite clearly exposed to the imposition of strong sanctions.’ " Id. at 166 (citation omitted); see Lozano v. City of Hazleton , 620 F.3d 170, 185 (3d Cir. 2010) (finding that standing existed where the plaintiffs were "direct targets of an ordinance they allege to be unconstit......
-
Pleading
...at *12-13 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 4, 2016); Lozano v. City of Hazleton , 496 F. Supp. 2d 477 (M.D. Pa. 2007), aff’d in part, vacated in part, 620 F.3d 170 (3d Cir. 2010), cert. granted, judgment vacated sub nom. City of Hazleton, Pa. v. Lozano , 563 U.S. 1030, 131 S. Ct. 2958, 180 L. Ed. 2d 243 (201......
-
Unforgiving of those who trespass against U.S.: state laws criminalizing immigration status.
...of U.S. v. Candelaria, 130 S. Ct. 3498 (2010). (137.) Lozano v. City of Hazleton, 496 F. Supp. 2d 477 (M.D. Penn. 2007) on appeal to 620 F.3d 170 (3d Cir. (138.) Napolitano, 544 F.3d at 981. (139.) Chamber of Commerce of U.S. v. Whiting, No. 09-115, 2010 WL 4974382 (U.S. 2010) (oral argumen......
-
Don't You Dare Live Here: the Constitutionality of the Anti-immigrant Employment and Housing Ordinances at Issue in Keller v. City of Fremont
...Department of Housing and Urban Development outlining restrictions on federal housing subsidies to noncitizens. 181. Id. at 770-72. 182. 620 F.3d 170, 219-24 (3d Cir. 2010), vacated, 131 S. Ct. 2958 183. Lozano v. City of Hazelton, 620 F.3d 170, 219-24 (3d Cir. 2010), vacated, 131 S. Ct. 29......
-
State Power to Regulate Immigration: Searching for a Workable Standard in Light Ofunited States v. Arizona Andkeller v. City of Fremont
...anti-immigration ordinances in Fremont, Nebraska, Hazelton, Pennsylvania, and Farmers Branch, Texas); see also Lozano v. City of Hazelton, 620 F.3d 170, (3d Cir. 2010), vacated, 131 S. Ct. 2958 (2011) (striking down the Hazelton ordinance); Villas at Parkside Partners v. City of Farmers Bra......