Pahrump embraces absurdity
Just when I thought Pahrump's Town Board couldn't get more absurd, village "culture warrior" Michael Miraglia proposes yet another loony ordinance. This one, I kid you not, forces undocumented foreign nationals to register when entering the town, which process includes paying a $200 fee, listing all aliases and forged documents in possession, and getting fingerprinted. Failure to register leads to large fines and on the third offense, I shit you not, deportation to the country of origin by the town itself, funded by the registration fees!
Then there's what I call the ACLU tax:
CHALLENGE FEE. Any non-government agency that shall challenge this undocumented foreign national ordinance shall upon challenge pay a $ 20,000.00 fee to cover any costs which may be incurred by the Town of Pahrump. The fee shall be non-refundable and shall be used for any legal challenges that may be incurred by the Town of Pahrump by the challenging party or parties.
Ha! First they try to override the Federal government's power over immigration laws, then they try to intimidate legal challengers with expensive, shall we say, First Amendment fees!? I don't have enough imagination to predict what they'll come up with next, but for now, here's the full text of the proposed ordinance to keep you entertained.
<<< New evidence for water on Mars Michael Mann likes buildings >>>
This latest ordinance rendered me totally incoherent. When I read it through for the first time, I was so amazed that all I could do was howl and wave my arms around convulsively.
This is bad for my country and good for my story idea.
Pardon me if it's obvious, but do they have any authority to make a challenger pay the "ACLU tax" anyway? I mean, to whom do they appeal if someone files against them in state or federal court and declines to pay the fee?
That's the absurdity -- they CAN'T impose a fee like the one proposed. I'm just a miserable 2L avoiding studying for her finals, but under 42 USC 1988, "the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than the [government], a reasonable attorney's fee as part of the costs."
As I undertand it, the ONLY time a court can impose fees on a challenger like the ACLU is when it determines that the litigation was frivilous.
I'll let the real lawyers tell me if I'm wrong.
Ah, but these aren't fees imposed by the court, this is a tax levy-able by the town. Or maybe not even a tax but a use fee. Of course, there's not a single court in the land that's going to uphold such a ludicrous fee, but it's a clever idea. One wonders why they bothered making it a relatively modest $20,000 fee and not a bankrupting $20,000,000,000 fee. I mean, if you're trying to dissuade attacks on your laws, why not go all the way with it and make the idea of losing really scary.
Man, I wonder if the town's lawyer hates his job. Do you think they run this sort of stuff by him first, or do they just go with it and expect him to pick up the pieces later on?
By the way, your link isn't working.
Does the town even have an actual illegal immigrant problem/population, or is it just a perceived problem?
Good gravy. What the hell has gotten into this town? Send in the national guard.
I think I saw the lawyer at the meeting where they passed the first ordinance, and he looked willing to participate.
pahrump is definitely a blessing for certain aclu lawyers we know, though. imagine how boring life would be if all you had to worry about was las vegas sliding to an "eat the homeless" law?
mmmmm..... homeless.
oh, the pahrump town lawyer (I'm assuming it's Not his dayjob) said, "I'm pretty sure this would pass muster," re: the disallowing of flying foreign flags, despite two supreme court cases quite blatantly holding the opposite (if indeed your legal spideysense ever failed you to the degree that references to said cases were in any way necessary to determine that private expression regulation wasn't squarely within the prohibitions of the first amendment).
Also, "petitioning for the redress of grievances" being in the 1st A. as well, it would seem that the ACLU tax is a blatant attack on the constitutional right to access the legal system. And although the Sec. 1988 fees are granted by the court, the legislative purpose was to encourage the bringing of meritorious suits by "private attys general" like yours truly, so there is still a solid argument that this fee is preempted by the federal statute. Again, I can't believe I'm making serious legal arguments about this ordinance, yet again. God Bless you, Pahrump.
And just to one up Ingen, I think this would have been the most appropriate remedy:
CHALLENGE FEE. Any non-government agency, or its employees, that shall challenge this undocumented foreign national ordinance shall upon challenge immediately be deported to Mexico in the back of a pickup with NRA and White People's Party stickers on display, in order to prevent any inconvenient truths which may be gleaned by the Town of Pahrump. The deportation shall be non-reversable and shall be used to offset any public humiliation which may be accrued to the Town of Pahrump by the challenging party or parties.
That sounds like a sensible alternative, flea. Beats tar and feathers, I guess.
[...] The Pahrump Town Board has punted that crazy ordinance proposal I wrote about last week, and the incoming board is likely to repeal the first crazy one. And even better, unlike the meeting I went to which was dominated by white, elderly jingoists, last night’s meeting was attended by hundreds from the Hispanic community. My favorite quote from the above Review-Journal article: One gray-haired woman held up her middle finger to the board as she stomped out of the community center following the vote. [...]