HAZLETON Pennsylvania
A federal judge's ruling that a Pennsylvania city may not enforce its tough anti-illegal immigration law could decide the fate of copycat measures adopted in other communities around the U.S.

U.S. District Judge James Munley found fault with just about every aspect of Hazleton's Illegal Immigration Relief Act, which he struck down Thursday in a 206-page opinion that declared states and municipalities have no business trying to stem illegal immigration.

Munley's decision applies only to Hazleton, but legal experts say it could lead to similar rulings elsewhere.

The decision is a road map for judges "inclined to find in favor of immigrant advocates," said Peter Spiro, who teaches immigration law at Temple University.

"This is a big victory for immigrants rights advocates ... in the first major case addressing one of these ordinances," he said. "They could hardly have asked for more."

Hazleton sought to impose fines on landlords who rent to illegal immigrants and deny business permits to companies that give them jobs. Another measure would have required tenants to register with City Hall and pay for a rental permit.

Inspired by the Hazleton crackdown, dozens of local governments around the U.S.have passed similar measures that seek to curtail illegal immigration. But Munley said such laws usurp the federal government's exclusive power to regulate immigration and deprive residents of their constitutional right to due process.

"Even if federal law did not conflict with Hazleton's measures, the city could not enact an ordinance that violates rights the Constitution guarantees to every person in the United States, whether legal resident or not," Munley wrote.

Munley also wrote that Hazleton's law was at odds with current federal immigration policy, which he said avoids "excessive enforcement" against illegal immigrants so as not to jeopardize foreign relations. Hazleton, he said, failed to consider "the implications of the ordinances on foreign policy."