Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
D.C.
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Mass.
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
N.Carolina
N.Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
S.Carolina
S.Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
W.Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Law Firm Website Design Companies : The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly


California’s attorney general on Wednesday asked the full 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider a ruling that rejected the state’s first-in-the-nation ban on for-profit private prisons and immigration detention facilities.

The ruling last month by a three-judge appellate panel kept in place a key piece of the world’s largest detention system for immigrants — despite a 2019 state law aimed at phasing out privately-run immigration jails in California by 2028.

“They treat people like commodities, they pose an unacceptable risk to the health and welfare of Californians, they prioritize profits over rehabilitation — making us all less safe,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta, who wrote the law when he was in the state Assembly and filed the request for the review by a broader cross-section of the court.

Gov. Gavin Newsom, a fellow Democrat who signed the law, said in a statement that the use of private immigration lockups “does not reflect the values of our state and disproportionately impacts minority and low-income communities.”

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and The Geo Group Inc., which sued California over the law, did not not immediately respond to emails seeking comment about Bonta’s request for the new review.

The three appellate judges, in a split decision, ruled that the state law interferes with the federal government’s authority.

Two appointees of former Republican president Donald Trump rejected the law while an appointee of former Democratic president Barack Obama dissented.

The law was passed as one of numerous efforts by California Democrats to limit the state’s cooperation with the federal government on immigration enforcement under the Trump administration.

But the administration of Democratic President Joe Biden also has opposed the law on constitutional grounds.

Legal News | Breaking News | Terms & Conditions | Privacy

ⓒ Breaking Legal News. All Rights Reserved.

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by BLN as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case. Small Law Firm Web Design by Law Promo Website Design
   More Legal News
   Legal Spotlight
   Exclusive Commentaries
   Attorney & Blog - Blog Watch
   Law Firm News  1  2  3  4  5  6 
   Lawyer & Law Firm Links
San Francisco Trademark Lawyer
San Francisco Copyright Lawyer
www.onulawfirm.com
Gurnee IL bankruptcy attorneys
Credit card debt lawyer
bankruptcylawchicago.com
New York Dental Malpractice Attorney
DUI Lawyer
dentalmalpracticenewyork.com
Indiana Medical Malpractice Attorneys
Indianapolis Medical Malpractice
www.williamspiatt.com
Surry County Criminal Defense Lawyers
Yadkin County Family Law Attorneys
www.dirussolaw.com
Oregon DUI Law Attorney
Eugene DUI Lawyer. Criminal Defense Law
www.mjmlawoffice.com
New York Adoption Lawyers
New York Foster Care Lawyers
Adoption Pre-Certification
www.lawrsm.com
Chicago, DuPage IL Workers' Compensation Lawyers
Chicago Workplace Injury Attorneys
www.krol-law.com
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Lorain Elyria Divorce Lawyer
www.loraindivorceattorney.com
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
   More Legal News  1  2  3  4  5  6
   Legal News Links
  Click The Law
  Daily Bar News
  The Legal Voice
  The Legal Report
  Legal News Post
  Crisis Legal News
  Legal News Journal
  Korean Web Agency
  Law Firm Directory