<< Waivers, Advisements, and the Totality of the Circumstances | Main | Oops >>

Oral Argument in US v Cal Sanctuary Case

Yesterday, U.S. District Judge John Mendez heard oral arguments in Sacramento in the federal government's suit against California over a triad of state laws.  Associated Press has this story.

The argument was unusual in a couple of ways.  First, it went all day.  That was common in olden times, but these days it is unusual for any oral argument to go more than an hour, at least in my experience.  Second, the judge told the parties up front to put aside their prepared remarks and go straight to Q & A.

According to the AP story, the judge was most skeptical of the California law regulating employer cooperation with the federal immigration authorities.  " 'The statute really puts the employer between a rock and a hard place,' he said." 

I also think that is the most vulnerable of the three, and CJLF's amicus brief focused on it.  The other bills may, all or in part, fall into the category that Justice Scalia famously described as "stupid but constitutional."

Leave a comment

Monthly Archives