Ariz. fights ruling on employers of immigrants

A federal judge in Pennsylvania got it wrong when he ruled that federal law prevents state and cities from enacting laws that punish companies for hiring undocumented workers, according to attorneys for Arizona.

In legal papers filed in federal court, the lawyers defending Arizona’s new employer sanction law contend the plain reading of federal statutes clearly gives states the power to take away licenses and permits from companies that knowingly hire these workers.

Assistant Attorney General Mary O’Grady and Tim Nelson, the governor’s chief legal counsel, concede that a federal court in Pennsylvania cited those same laws in July when he struck down city ordinances in Hazleton. One provision of those laws was virtually identical to the measure approved by Arizona lawmakers just a month earlier — and now being challenged by various groups here.

But the two attorneys told U.S. District Court Judge Neil Wake, who is hearing the lawsuit here, to ignore the ruling of his colleague in Pennsylvania.

The lawyers acknowledged that Congress specifically said only the federal government can regulate immigration. And that includes imposing fines on firms that are hiring people who are not here legally.

But they noted that federal statutes do allows other levels of government to punish firms “through licensing and other similar laws.”

The Arizona statute, they point out, says a firm which knowingly hires an undocumented worker can lose any state licenses or permits for up to 10 days for a first offense. A second offense within three years means permanent revocation.

In Pennsylvania, U.S. District Court Judge James Munley read the same federal statute before striking down the Hazleton ordinance which suspended the city license to do business of firms hiring those not here legally. He said the flaw in the Hazleton ordinance is it put the city and state courts — and not the federal government — in the position of determining who is legally entitled to work and who is not.

Attorney David Selden, who represents business groups who are trying to overturn the Arizona law, said the same flaw exists here: Companies accused of hiring undocumented workers would face trial in state courts.

The two state attorneys said Munley’s decision is wrong.

“Nothing precludes state courts from making decisions that involve determining whether a person is an ‘unauthorized alien,’” they wrote. They said accepting Munley’s ruling — and the contentions of the challengers to Arizona’s law — “renders meaningless the preemption exemption for sanctions involving licensing and similar laws.”

They also said the severity of the state punishment does not run afoul of federal law. Instead, they argued, Congress “left states the authority and discretion to adopt such sanctions through licensing laws as they deem appropriate.”

Aside from business groups, the law is also being challenged by Chicanos Por La Causa and Somos America, who are concerned about the effect of the statute on Hispanics, legal and otherwise.