Hazleton ordinance blocked by judge James Munley; ACLU wins for now

U.S. District judge James Munley (a Clinton appointee) has struck down Hazleton Pennsylvania's Illegal Immigration Relief Act, a big win for the ACLU, a group indirectly linked to the Mexican government.

You can download the 200 page ruling in a PDF linked from either of these:

I just scanned the beginning, but the judge's arguments regarding the harm that the plaintiffs endured seem rather weak. For instance, the Lechugas complained about a police car parked outside their restaurant and said that played a part in it being shut down because people said it was there to take away their customers:

Lechuga blamed his lack of business on the City's activities. A police car was often parked across the street from the restaurant, and after a police officer paid a visit, "people began to comment that the police [were] there to take the clients away when they came to eat."

Should Hazleton be held responsible for such myth-making? Regarding Lechuga's first claim, see: ACLU's anti-Hazleton star witness admits myth-making.

Regarding a landlord plaintiff the judge says:

We disagree with the defendant that these injuries cannot be recognized by the law because they constitute a complaint about an inability to rent to illegal immigrants. The plaintiffs testified that they were unaware of the immigration status of their renters. No evidence, therefore, indicates that the renters they lost were illegal immigrants. Such tenants may have been legal residents who did not desire to live in a town that appeared (to them) to seek to exclude Spanish-speaking residents. Such tenants may also have concluded that they did not want to register with the town and provide private information to the City as a condition of residing there. Perhaps they found the fees required for a permit onerous. In any case, we will not assume that the renters plaintiff lost were necessarily illegal immigrants.

Bolding added. Once again, if they have such unjustified feelings, should Hazleton be held responsible? Should the judge strike down all other cases where residents of a town have to provide personal information, such as when obtaining a building, dog, or bike license? Those involve fees as well.

Hopefully this will be appealed and a higher court will have more sense.

I've pointed out many times before how you - yes, you - can resolve this issue: discredit those who support illegal immigration. If that's done, judges like Munley will just be far-left voices in the wilderness.


Justice is indeed blind. What about the rights of hardworking AMERICAN citizens who reside in Hazleton? Since when do people who entered our nation IN VIOLATION OF THE IMMIGRATION LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES HAVE ANY RIGHTS? It would seem that Munley has given tacit approval to the presence of ILLEGAL ALIENS IN HAZLETON. I hope this rather questionable ruling is overruled, and to hell with leftist jurists and lawyers who care more about illegal aliens than AMERICAN CITIZENS, including citizens who came here for a better way of life and EARNED THEIR AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP ACCORDING TO THE LAWS OF OUR LAND. Earth to Judge Munley, hello?!

Agreed. This judge should be impeached, tried, and convicted of treason. The constitution was never meant to protect criminal alien invaders, and any ruling which holds otherwise amounts to treason. The punishment for treason is death. This is the only legal way to deal with despots and tyrants sitting on the federal bench: hang them from a gallows. If this fails on appeal, those judges should hang too. This is not merely a gross miscarriage of justice, this is the adjudication of tyranny by the enemies of these United States, ACLU included.

I have high hopes that this will be overturned on appeal. In the meantime, a big risk to small towns like Hazleton is that those tax-paying, law-abiding citizens will say "Who needs this?" and move elsewhere. A lot of sprawl is illegal aliens moving into areas en masse and the former residents leaving to make room for them. Many of these residents aren't so much fleeing the people themselves as they are fleeing the conditions they brought with them or caused after they got there: over-crowded schools, hospital ER's, and housing, depressed wages, noise, litter, crime, destruction of "community", etc

This judge should be disrobed. It is not the judges place to chance our constitution, that job is for congress.

The judge was correct. Read the ruling, if you are capable.