◼ Calif. cities' military recruiting laws tossed AP, via The Journal 1:52 p.m.
◼ Judge tosses Youth Protection Acts TS 2:12:19 PM
◼ Court deals blow to Youth Protection Acts Updated version
< Ahem! Deals blow? >
A U.S. District Court has thrown out the 2008 ballot measures passed by Arcata and Eureka voters that aimed to block the military from recruiting minors in the cities.
Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong ruled in favor of the federal government in San Francisco today, saying the cities hadn't shown that they had suffered any injury. Armstrong wrote that the cities have no standing to bring the claims, which were based in part on alleged constitutional violations.
Arcata and Eureka voters in November passed the ballot measures. The federal government sued, saying the U.S. Constitution's Supremacy Clause doesn't allow cities to regulate the activities of the United States.
Arcata and Eureka countersued, claiming the U.S. military's recruiting policies violate a 2002 international treaty that bans recruiting of children under 17.
Armstrong ordered that the cities are permanently prevented from enforcing the ordinances.
Updated: Arcata City Attorney Nancy Diamond said that the litigation team that worked on the case is evaluating Armstrong's ruling. She said that the City Council would be briefed at its next meeting on July 1. Diamond also said that appealing the matter is not being ruled out.
”We're going to give it a very good, fair evaluation,” Diamond said....
Arcata Councilman Mark Wheetley said that the city will have to determine whether there are grounds for an appeal of the matter. He said that while the city committed to taking on the court battle, at some point it will also have to consider its fiduciary responsibilities.
attaching docs developing.
The Court accordingly ORDERS that the motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted; and further DECLARES that Arcata, California, Ballot Measure F (2008), and Eureka, California, Ballot Measure J (2008), violate the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution, and are invalid, and further ORDERS that the defendant, the City of Arcata, California, and its successors, agents, and employees, are hereby permanently enjoined to cease and desist from the enforcement of the ordinance that was enacted by Arcata, California, Ballot Measure F (2008); and further ORDERS that the defendant, the City of Eureka, California, and its successors, agents, and employees, are hereby permanently enjoined to cease and desist from the enforcement of the ordinance that was enacted by Eureka, California, Ballot Measure J (2008).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
◼ Time to move on TS editorial