Huntington Beach, California – Nearly seven years after an initial legal defeat, the city of Huntington Beach has launched a new legal challenge against California’s sanctuary state law, alleging the law inhibits local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration authorities and thus violates the U.S. Constitution. City leaders disclosed that their federal lawsuit was filed on Tuesday in the Central District of California.
In the lawsuit, plaintiffs include the city itself, the city council, its police department, and the chief of police. They are contesting the constitutionality of the California Values Act, also known as Senate Bill 54 (SB 54), asserting that it contradicts the Supremacy and Naturalization Clauses of the Constitution by restricting local authorities’ cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.
Huntington Beach City Attorney Michael Gates articulated in an interview that the sanctuary state law not only contradicts federal immigration regulations but also hampers effective law enforcement. He pointed out that under federal law, harboring unauthorized immigrants is a criminal offense, and yet, SB 54 mandates local officials to act in ways that breach these laws.
Echoing Gates’ concerns, Mayor Pat Burns stressed the implications for public safety, arguing that the law obstructs the city’s efforts to leverage federal resources to counteract serious crimes, including human trafficking and gang violence. Burns underscored the need for all available resources to combat crime, especially against the backdrop of rising criminal activities posed by foreign gangs.
This lawsuit unfolds as immigration remains a prominent national issue, especially with Donald Trump commencing his second presidential term soon. Stephen Miller, a known immigration hardliner and adviser to Trump, has been designated as deputy chief of staff for policy, further spotlighting immigration policies. Miller’s nonprofit has also recently been proactive, sending numerous letters to states and cities with sanctuary policies, cautioning them about potential repercussions.
Previously, in Trump’s first term, his administration challenged three Californian immigration laws, including SB 54, which was enacted in 2017. However, a panel from the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the law in 2019, highlighting that federal laws do not restrict California from implementing such legislation under its police powers.
This isn’t the city’s first attempt to seek exemption from the sanctuary state law due to its status as a charter city. In 2018, Huntington Beach filed an initial lawsuit against then-California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and won a favorable ruling from an Orange County Superior Court judge. However, this decision was reversed by the 4th District Court of Appeal in 2020, and the California Supreme Court subsequently declined to review the case.
Legal experts like Annie Lai from UC Irvine, specializing in immigration law, have voiced skepticism about the success of the new lawsuit, considering the appellate courts’ prior decisions on these matters, suggesting the city’s latest legal action might be driven more by political motivations than legal grounds. Similarly, Niels Frenzen from the USC Gould School of Law emphasized that SB 54 aims to assure state and local communities that they are not targets for arrest merely based on their immigration status, promoting cooperation with law enforcement in broader societal issues such as vaccinations and schooling.
The assertion in the lawsuit that earlier opinions by state attorneys general deemed local sanctuary policies illegal reflects an ongoing debate over the alignment of state and federal law concerning immigration, pointing to a complex legal and political battleground that continues to shape the discourse on immigration in America.
This article was automatically written by Open AI. Information related to people, facts, circumstances, and the overarching story may be inaccurate. Corrections or removal requests can be sent to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.