Lozano v. City of Hazleton
| Decision Date | 26 July 2007 |
| Docket Number | No. 3:06cv1586.,3:06cv1586. |
| Citation | 496 F.Supp.2d 477 |
| Parties | Pedro LOZANO, Humberto Hernandez, Rosa Lechuga, Jose Luis Lechuga, John Doe 1, John Doe 3, John Doe 7, Jane Doe 5, Casa Dominica of Hazleton, Inc., Hazleton Hispanic Business Association, and Pennsylvania Statewide Latino Coalition, Plaintiffs v. CITY OF HAZLETON, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Pennsylvania |
David Vaida, Law Office of David Vaida, Allentown, PA, Denise Alvarez, Foster Maer, Ghita Schwarz, Jackson Chin, Rich
and Bellman, Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, New York, NY, Doreen Y. Trujillo, Ilan Rosenberg, Linda S. Kaiser, Thomas B. Fiddler, Thomas G. Wilkinson, Jr., William J. Taylor, Cozen O'Connor, Philadelphia, PA, Douglas W. Frankenthaler, Cozen O'Connor, Cherry Hill, NJ, Elena Park, Cozen O'Connor, West Conshohocken, PA, George R. Barron, Wilkes-Barre, PA, Jennifer C. Chang, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, Lucas Guttentag, San Francisco, CA, Lee Gelernt, Omar C. Jadwat, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, New York, NY, Mary Catherine Roper, American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, Witold J. Walczak, American Civil Liberties Union of PA, Pittsburgh, PA, Laurence E. Norton, II, Peter Zurflieh, Shamaine A. Daniels, Community Justice Project, Harrisburg, PA, for Plaintiffs.
Carla P. Maresca, Harry G. Mahoney, Andrew B. Adair, Deasey, Mahoney & Bender, Ltd., Philadelphia, PA, Kris W. Kobach, Kansas City, MI, Michael M. Hethmon, Immigration Reform Law Institute, Washington, DC, William Perry Pendley, Elizabeth Gallaway, Mountain States Legal Foundation, Lakewood, CO, for Defendant.
DECISION
This case addresses Defendant City of Hazleton's authority to enact ordinances that regulate the presence and employment of illegal aliens.1 Before the court for disposition is plaintiffs' complaint challenging the validity of those ordinances. Trial has been held on this matter, and the parties have filed briefs setting forth their respective positions. The matter is thus ripe for disposition.
Background including findings of fact
Defendant City of Hazleton is located in Luzerne County in northeastern Pennsylvania. The city's executive is a mayor and the city's legislature is a city council. Under Pennsylvania law, Hazleton is a City of the Third Class and operates under an Optional Plan B form of government. (Notes of trial testimony (hereinafter "N.T") 3/15/07 at 204-05).
At the time of the 2000 census, Hazleton's population was 23,000. (N.T. 3/16/07 at 145-46). Since 2000, Hazleton's population has increased sharply, and now has an estimated 30,000 to 33,000 residents. (148, 2007 Budget Proposal, at 1-2; N.T. 3/19/07 at 163-64).
The increase in Hazleton's population can be explained largely by a recent influx of immigrants, most of whom are Latino. (N.T. 3/16/07 at 146). After the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, many Latino families moved from New York and New Jersey to Hazleton seeking a better life, employment and affordable housing. (N.T. 3/12/07 at 66-67; N.T. 3/14/07 at 29-30). Those moving to Hazleton included United States citizens, lawful permanent residents and undocumented immigrants. (N.T. 3/13/07 at 161; N.T. 3/14/07 at 29-30).
The number of undocumented immigrants in Hazleton is unknown. (N.T. 3/16/07 at 146). Immigrants, both legal and undocumented, support the local economy through consumer spending, paying rent and paying sales taxes. (N.T. 3/14/07 at 67-70).
Beginning on July 13, 2006, the City of Hazleton enacted numerous ordinances aimed at combating what the city viewed as the problems created by the presence of "illegal aliens." On July 13, 2006, Ordinance 2006-10, the city's first version of its "Illegal Immigration Relief Act Ordinance" was passed. This ordinance prohibits the employment and harboring of undocumented aliens in the City of Hazleton. On August 15, 2006, the city passed the "Tenant Registration Ordinance," Ordinance 2006-13 ("RO"). This ordinance requires apartment dwellers to obtain an occupancy permit. To receive such a permit, they must prove they are citizens or lawful residents.
On September 21, 2006, Hazleton enacted Ordinance 2006-18, entitled the "Illegal Immigration Relief Act Ordinance" ("IIRA") and Ordinance 2006-19, the "Official English Ordinance." These two ordinances replaced the original Illegal Immigration Relief Act. On December 28, 2006, Hazleton enacted Ordinance 2006-40, which amended IIRA by adding an "implementation and process" section. During the trial of the above matter, the city enacted the final ordinance at issue in this case, Ordinance 2007-6, which made minor, but important, changes to the language of portions of IIRA.2
At issue in the instant case are IIRA3 and RO.4 IIRA defines "illegal alien" as 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." (IIRA § 3.D.). Title 8, section 1101, et seq. is commonly referred to as the Immigration and Nationality Act or "INA". The INA provides no definition for the term "illegal alien" or the term "lawfully present." (N.T. 3/19/07 at 130).
Generally, under federal law, aliens can be present in the country as: 1) lawfully admitted non-immigrants, i.e., visitors, those in the country temporarily; and 2) lawful immigrants, lawful permanent residents, referred to sometimes as "green card holders." (N.T. 3/19/07 at 112-13). Lawfully admitted for permanent residence status can be attained in various ways, including family or employment characteristics, the "green card lottery" or relief such as asylum. (Id. at 112-13).
A third category of aliens present in the country are "undocumented aliens" who lack lawful immigration status. These aliens may have overstayed their time in the United States or entered the country illegally. (Id. at 113). The number of these individuals is approximately twelve million. (Id.). Hazleton's use of the term "illegal alien" evidently is aimed at these individuals.
On August 15, 2006, plaintiffs filed the instant action to challenge the validity of the Hazleton ordinances. On October 30, 2006, an amended complaint was filed along with a motion for a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order seeking to enjoin the defendant from enforcing the ordinances.
On October 31, 2006, the court granted the plaintiffs' request for a Temporary Restraining Order. (Doc. 35). The court ordered that the Temporary Restraining Order remain in effect until November 14, 2006 and scheduled a hearing on the preliminary injunction motion for November 13, 2006. (Doc. 36). In order to conduct discovery and fully brief the issues raised in the amended complaint, the parties entered into a stipulation to extend the Temporary Restraining Order for 120 days or until trial and resolution of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Martinez v. Regents of University of California
...all legislation conferring any benefits on illegal immigrants, even emergency medical care. Defendants cite Lozano v. City of Hazleton (M.D.Pa. 2007) 496 F.Supp.2d 477 at page 498, as stating the single illegal act of entering this country without legal authorization does not strip individu......
-
Cent. Ala. Fair Hous. Ctr. v. Magee
...Partners v. City of Farmers Branch, 577 F.Supp.2d 858 (N.D.Tex.2008) (Lindsay, J.) (“ Farmers Branch I ”); Lozano v. City of Hazleton, 496 F.Supp.2d 477 (M.D.Pa.2007) (Munley, J.); Garrett, 465 F.Supp.2d at 1056–57.a. Federal Immigration Law Enacted in 1952, the Immigration and Nationality ......
-
Keller v. City of Fremont
...lease. The United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania addressed this issue in Lozano v. City of Hazleton, 496 F.Supp.2d 477, 546–48 (M.D.Pa.2007) (“Lozano I ”), vacated in part,620 F.3d 170 (3d Cir.2010), vacated and remanded,––– U.S. ––––, 131 S.Ct. 2958, 180 L.Ed......
-
Cent. Alabama Fair Hous. Ctr. v. Magee
...v. City of Farmers Branch, 577 F. Supp. 2d 858 (N.D. Tex. 2008) (Lindsay, J.) ("Farmers Branch I"); Lozano v. City of Hazleton, 496 F. Supp. 2d 477(M.D. Pa. 2007) (Munley, J.); Garrett, 465 F. Supp. 2d at 1056-57.a. Federal Immigration Law Enacted in 1952, the Immigration and Nationality Ac......
-
Pleading
...privacy claim); Doe v. City of New York , 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16344, 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,......
-
Unforgiving of those who trespass against U.S.: state laws criminalizing immigration status.
...cert. granted by Chamber of Commerce of U.S.v. Candelaria, 130 S. Ct. 3498 (Jun. 28, 2010) (No. 09-115); Lozano v. City of Hazleton, 496 F. Supp. 2d 477 (M.D. Pa. (108.) De Canas v. Bica, 424 U.S. 351, 356 (1976). (109.) U.S. CONST. art. VI, § 1, cl. 2. (110.) McKanders, Hazleton, supra not......
-
Judith Resnik, Foreign as Domestic Affairs: Rethinking Horizontal Federalism and Foreign Affairs Preemption in Light of Translocal Internationalism
...v. Miller, 389 U.S. 429 (1968), discussed infra notes 179-85 and accompanying text. 175 See, e.g., Lozano v. City of Hazelton, 496 F. Supp. 2d 477, 517-30 (M.D. Pa. 2007). This decision is an example of the use of federal law to strike a local anti-immigrant effort, called the "Illegal Immi......
-
Car Stops, Borders, and Profiling: the Hunt for Undocumented (illegal?) Immigrants in Border Towns
...(9th Cir. 2009), cert. granted sub nom., Chamber of Commerce v. Candelaria, 130 S. Ct. 3498 (2009), with Lozano v. City of Hazelton, 496 F. Supp. 2d 477, 517-29 (M.D. Pa. 2007) (holding that state-based immigration ordinances are expressly and impliedly 141. See, e.g., Holeman v. City of Ne......