Opponents of the ordinance, including the ALCU and Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund are challenging the city of Hazleton's illegal immigrant crackdown, which if found constitutional, will definitely set a precedent across the nation.
What does the Hazelton case have to do with Connecticut?
Quite simply, it's logical to assume that Danbury Republican Mayor Mark Boughton would consider adopting a similar ordinance (probably in late 2007-early 2008) since this is the same mayor who requested the Gov. Rell to allow Danbury to enter a Memorandum of Understanding with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement that would deputize the state and local police offices to enforce federal immigration laws. Anti-immigrant supporters in Danbury are aggressively lobbying city hall to adopt the ordinance if Hazelton prevails in their challenge. Trust me, the anti-immigration crowd are watching this case very closely which is why everyone should keep an eye on this case.
Recently at the Stop the Raids immigration forum, John Garcia, communications director for the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, who are part of the lawsuit, criticized the Hazelton ordinance. Garcia also challenged the anti-immigrant critics who shockingly didn't attend the forum opting instead to pull a phony photo-op for the press outside White Hall (although anti-immigrant xenophobe leader Elise Marciano was promised all the time she needed to challenge the facts presented by the members of the panel during the discussion portion of the forum).
We'll address the whole anti-immigrant cop-out at the forum later, for now, here's a video highlight of Garcia addressing the audience about the case.
(Note: I had to change tapes in the middle of Garcia's speech). (Note 2: Although the video window is black, the file works so just hit play)
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
Today marks the day when a controversial immigration ordinance in Hazelton PA will be the subject of federal court action.
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
