Clicky


Email this article Printer friendly page

 For Immediate Release
Jul 17, 2006 Contact: Press Office
202-646-5188


Judicial Watch Challenges the LAPD's "Special Order 40" in New Court Filing




Illegal Immigration “Sanctuary” Policy Violates Federal Law

 

Court Hearing Scheduled for July 27

 

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch, the public interest group that fights government corruption, announced today that it filed a memorandum in the Los Angeles County Superior Court further supporting its legal challenge to the Los Angeles Police Department’s “Special Order 40,” a policy that prohibits police officers from inquiring about an individual’s immigration status and reportedly restricts police officers from cooperating with federal immigration officials (Harold P. Sturgeon v. William J. Bratton, et al., Case No. BC351646.)  Filed on July 14th in response to the defendants’ “demurrer,” which would effectively dismiss the lawsuit, Judicial Watch’s memorandum argues that “Special Order 40” violates federal law.  A court hearing is scheduled for July 27.

 

“It cannot be denied that Special Order 40 and the policies, practices, and procedures arising thereunder violate both the letter and spirit of [federal law],” Judicial Watch argued in its court filing.  “The LAPD has adopted what is in effect a ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy with respect to immigration status.  Under ordinary circumstances, a ‘cop on the beat’ who suspects an individual of being in the United States illegally cannot inquire about that individual’s immigration status…He cannot undertake any investigation at all.”

 

In 1996, Congress enacted legislation which states, “…a Federal, State, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (now Immigration and Customs Enforcement) information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual.” 

 

“The Los Angeles Police Department needs to stop undermining our nation’s immigration laws,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.  “Special Order 40 is unlawful and dangerous.  It prevents police officers from communicating freely with federal immigration officials and puts American citizens at risk from criminal illegal aliens.”

 

Judicial Watch filed its “Special Order 40” lawsuit on April 28, 2006 in the Superior Court for the State of California, County of Los Angeles. 

 

Click here to read Judicial Watch’s court filing.

 

Click here to read more about Judicial Watch’s campaign against Special Order 40.

 

###



Top of Page



Group waiting for action on Code Pink digs - Washington Times (October 25, 2007)
Dishwashers for Clinton - Washington Post (October 22, 2007)
Papers? I Don’t See Any Papers. - Newsweek (Oct 29, 2007)
Their Seven Deadly Sins - American Spectator (October 18, 2007)
Accused Law Firm Continues Giving to Democrat - New York Times (October 18, 2007)
Prosecution Rests in California Bribery Trial - The Washington Post (October 18, 2007)
Hillary leads in donor refunds - Washington Times (October 17, 2007)
ARPAIO TARGETS DAY LABORER COMPLAINTS IN CITY OF PHOENIX - Maricopa County Sheriff's Office (October 15, 2007)
The Convict and the Congressman - Conde Nast (November 2007)
White House Denies Delaying Release of Clinton Records - New York Sun (October 12, 2007)
Effort to Curb Illegal Workers' Hiring Blocked - Washington Post (October 11, 2007)
He’s back: Sandy Berger now advising Hillary Clinton - Examiner.com (October 8, 2007)
Illegal immigrants are issued ID cards in some places - USA Today (October 4, 2007)
Former Presidents Can't Withhold Records - Washington Post (October 2, 2007)
Hsu raised big money for Clinton supporters - The Boston Globe (September 26, 2007)