State says challenge is ‘premature'

By Devona Walker

Published: November 7, 2007

The attorney general's office asked a federal court on Tuesday to throw out a legal challenge to Oklahoma's new immigration law, considered one of the toughest in the nation.

"We are arguing it's a premature lawsuit. The state court should sort out the alleged ambiguities of the statutes before the federal court makes a determination as to constitutionality,” said Charlie Price, spokesman for Attorney General Drew Edmondson.

It's the second time such arguments have been made.

The lawsuit was filed by the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Religious Leaders, multiple John and Jane Doe plaintiffs, a handful of Oklahoma businesses and two churches.

•The federal court does not have proper jurisdiction over a statute that has allegedly violated the Oklahoma constitution.

•Henry and Edmondson are improper defendants in the case, without any direct connection with the statutes.

•The court should "abstain from hearing” the case to avoid conflicting with "important state functions.”

•The plaintiffs cannot prove the law has caused them concrete harm.

"We are not arguing on the merits of the case,” Price said. "We are arguing the exact same things as we did last time. There is no need for a lawsuit,” Price said, adding that the state maintains the plaintiffs involved have not been harmed by the law. House Bill 1804 hadn't taken effect when the first lawsuit was filed Oct. 15.

The plaintiffs have until Thursday to file a response.

Judge James Payne dismissed the case Oct.22, on the grounds the plaintiffs had no standing.

The plaintiffs refiled Oct. 25, and amended the lawsuit on Oct. 31, a few hours before a hearing in which they were arguing for a temporary injunction. Payne denied the 11th-hour injunction that would have blocked HB 1804 from going into effect the next day.Payne said the plaintiffs failed to bring evidence to show the law would cause irrevocable harm. He did not weigh in on the merits of the case.

Comments