HomeFairfax General ForumArrest/Ticket SearchWiki newPictures/VideosChatArticlesLinksAbout
Fairfax County General :  Fairfax Underground fairfax underground logo
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Challenge Against PWC Ordinance Tossed
Posted by: Howie ()
Date: November 30, 2007 12:28PM

ALEXANDRIA, Va. - A local law designed to crack down on illegal immigration will stand -- for now.
A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit challenging parts of Prince William County's recent efforts to clamp down on illegal immigrants.

At a brief hearing Friday in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Judge James Cacheris said the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the resolution passed earlier this year by the Prince William County Board of Supervisors.

Among other things, the resolution requires police to check the immigration status of people they detain if they believe the person is an illegal immigrant.

County attorneys had argued that the plaintiffs could not demonstrate that they had suffered any harm under the resolution.

Plaintiff lawyer Christina Sarchio said she is considering an appeal.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Challenge Against PWC Ordinance Tossed
Posted by: Observer ()
Date: November 30, 2007 03:00PM

so much for blatently unconstitutional.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Challenge Against PWC Ordinance Tossed
Posted by: Fairfax MF---er ()
Date: November 30, 2007 03:39PM

Observer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> so much for blatently unconstitutional.


It means it hasn't been in place long enough for people to be hurt by it. It doesn't mean that it's not unconstitutional.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Challenge Against PWC Ordinance Tossed
Posted by: MG3151980 ()
Date: November 30, 2007 04:07PM

Fairfax MF---er Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Observer Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > so much for blatently unconstitutional.
>
>
> It means it hasn't been in place long enough for
> people to be hurt by it. It doesn't mean that it's
> not unconstitutional.

Fairfax MF---er ALSO Wrote:
"As for demonstrating that someone has actually suffered harm from this, I don't doubt that that should be a consideration. However, it isn't the ONLY consideration. That's why we have things like injunctions and precedent, because of potential harm or harm demonstrated in similar cases."

-- It appears it was, in fact, the ONLY consideration. No injunction, no discussion of injunction, simply dismissed. Any other good observations you wish to make. This thing won't see the inside of an appeals hearing.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Challenge Against PWC Ordinance Tossed
Posted by: Fairfax MF---er ()
Date: November 30, 2007 04:15PM

MG3151980 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Any other good
> observations you wish to make. This thing won't
> see the inside of an appeals hearing.


Yes...

Christina Sarchio, the lead lawyer on the case for Howry, said the case could still go forward if the law firm finds plaintiffs who can show harm from the resolution.

Sarchio said the constitutionality of the resolution has yet to be tested.

“What the judge said from the bench ... was that he was granting the county’s motion to dismiss on standing grounds, but that the decision on the merits of the case is something to be left for another day,” Sarchio said.


...Obviously a lot of good lawyers thought this case should move forward, so it's not like various aspects weren't considered by the judge. I still argue that this is blatantly unconstitutional. There is nothing to prevent this from going forward in a few months when people are actually harmed by it.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Challenge Against PWC Ordinance Tossed
Posted by: WashingToneLocian ()
Date: November 30, 2007 07:58PM

This pretty much illustrates the problem...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJMqdUGZZ9s

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Challenge Against PWC Ordinance Tossed
Posted by: Easy ()
Date: December 01, 2007 01:32AM

Except one guy can speak English and the other can't.

Options: ReplyQuote


Your Name: 
Your Email (Optional): 
Subject: 
Attach a file
  • No file can be larger than 75 MB
  • All files together cannot be larger than 300 MB
  • 30 more file(s) can be attached to this message
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 ********  **      **  **     **  **     **  **     ** 
 **    **  **  **  **  **     **   **   **   ***   *** 
     **    **  **  **  **     **    ** **    **** **** 
    **     **  **  **  *********     ***     ** *** ** 
   **      **  **  **  **     **    ** **    **     ** 
   **      **  **  **  **     **   **   **   **     ** 
   **       ***  ***   **     **  **     **  **     ** 
This forum powered by Phorum.