Farmers Branch proposed ordinance

Members of Farmers Branch City Council are scheduled tonight to vote on repealing their divisive Ordinance No. 2892 and replacing it with divisive proposed Ordinance 2903.

As reported here:

David Urias, a staff attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said the proposed ordinance appears very similar to the one passed in November, which MALDEF is challenging in a federal lawsuit.

"They made slight refinements based on some of the challenges that were made to it, but overall it is still an attempt to turn apartment owners into immigration officials," Urias said. "The city would still mandate that they check persons' documents and that is going to be a big problem for our client tenants and apartment owners."

I agree.

I also maintain that putting Ordinance 2903 up for simple majority vote by the residents of Farmers Branch, which 2903 does, doesn’t confer on it any special legitimacy. I understand the value of folks being given an opportunity to express their feelings on this issue through a referendum. Doing so will give Farmers Branch residents a direct say-so in the affairs of their community, and obviously that is the preferred way to go than the sneaky behind-closed-doors shenanigans the City Council members used with Ordinance 2892.

Still, if 2903 were to pass muster with the voters (assuming a court ruling doesn’t prevent a vote on it in the first place), that doesn’t at all mean that the ordinance is legal. California Proposition 187, a 1994 ballot initiative designed to deny illegal immigrants social services, health care, and public education, passed with 58.8% of the vote. Majority support for that initiative, however, didn’t stop a court from finding it was an unconstitutional measure on the basis that federal law overrides state authority in immigration matters.

The pushers of ordinances 2892 and 2903 would undoubtedly use majority approval as legitimacy cover to continue to push this matter forward on political and legal fronts. But doing so would really only serve to prevent the City Council from executing their duties intelligently, respectfully, honestly, with respect for all cultures, religions, and races and without prejudice. Unless, of course, they don’t subscribe to that mission.