University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Assembly of God Church Riverside v. Township of Riverside, New Jersey IM-NJ-0002
Docket / Court 1:06-cv-03842-RMB-AMD ( D.N.J. )
State/Territory New Jersey
Case Type(s) Immigration and/or the Border
Case Summary
Plaintiffs filed this class-action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for New Jersey to challenge the constitutionality of the Town of Riverside Ordinance 2006-16 ("Illegal Immigration Relief Act"), which forbid housing and employment of undocumented immigrants. Plaintiffs alleged that the ... read more >
Plaintiffs filed this class-action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for New Jersey to challenge the constitutionality of the Town of Riverside Ordinance 2006-16 ("Illegal Immigration Relief Act"), which forbid housing and employment of undocumented immigrants. Plaintiffs alleged that the Ordinance was an improper attempt by local government to enforce federal immigration laws in violation of the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution and that it caused national origin discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fair Housing Act and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Plaintiffs sought injunctive and declaratory relief, as well as class certification.

This case was one of two lawsuits challenging the Ordinance. The other case, Riverside Coalition of Business Persons and Landlords v. Township of Riverside, cause # L-2965-06. [IM-NJ-1], was filed in New Jersey state court and challenged the Ordinance as violating the New Jersey Constitution.

Riverside initially agreed to suspend enforcement of the Ordinance or any amendments while the legality of the Ordinance was litigated. Riverside's agreement resulted in a Consent Order being entered in the state court case on October 25, 2006. Despite that agreement, the Riverside Township Council introduced a revised version of the Ordinance at its council meeting on the evening of October 25, 2006. On November 22, 2006, the Township approved and enacted Revised Ordinance 2006-26 which was patterned on a similar ordinance enacted in Hazleton, Pennsylvania. (The Hazleton Ordinance was the subject of federal court litigation - see Lozano v. City of Hazleton, IM-PA-1).

On January 5, 2007, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint to reflect that the Ordinance had been amended by Revised Ordinance 2006-26. Plaintiffs also voluntarily dismissed the Riverside mayor as a party defendant. The District Court entered a scheduling order which set deadlines for discovery and dispositive motions.

Citing escalating legal costs and an adverse ruling in the Lozano v. City of Hazleton case, the Township introduced a measure in August 2007 to repeal the Revised Ordinance 2006-26. On September 17, 2007, the Township Council repealed Revised Ordinance 2006-26 by a 3 to 1 vote.

On September 21, 2007, plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment and motion for attorneys' fees. Defendants opposed plaintiffs' request for attorneys' fees, citing the fact that the Township voluntarily repealed the Revised Ordinance.

The court dismissed the pending motions and closed the case on November 30, 2007.

Elizabeth Daligga - 07/16/2012


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Constitutional Clause
Federalism
Immigration/Border
Constitutional rights
Undocumented immigrants - state and local regulation
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Causes of Action Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101 et seq.
42 U.S.C. § 1983
42 U.S.C. § 1981
Defendant(s) Township of Riverside
Plaintiff Description The class consists of the following ascertainable members: all persons who currently reside in Riverside and find themselves to be negatively affected by the proposed unconstitutional ordinance.
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted Yes
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Unknown
Nature of Relief Ordinance repealed by Township
Source of Relief Unknown
Case Ongoing No
Case Listing IM-NJ-0001 : Riverside Coalition of Business Persons and Landlords v. Township of Riverside, New Jersey (State Court)
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
  SUMMARY:The Nationwide Perez-Fuñez Permanent Injunction Provisions for Unaccompanied Children in DHS Custody
www.nilc.org
Date: June 2014
By: National Immigration Law Center (National Immigration Law Center)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

Docket(s)
1:06-cv-03842-RMB-AMD (D.N.J.)
IM-NJ-0002-9000.pdf | Detail
Date: 11/02/2007
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Complaint for Declaratory, Injunctive and Further Relief
IM-NJ-0002-0001.pdf | Detail
Date: 08/15/2006
Answer and Affirmative Defenses [ECF# 6]
IM-NJ-0002-0002.pdf | Detail
Date: 10/03/2006
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Amended Complaint for Declaratory, Injunctive and Further Relief
IM-NJ-0002-0003.pdf | Detail
Date: 01/05/2007
Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum of Law [ECF# 27]
IM-NJ-0002-0004.pdf | Detail
Date: 09/25/2007
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Defendant's Brief in Response to Motion for Fees - Statement of Facts [ECF# 34]
IM-NJ-0002-0005.pdf | Detail
Date: 11/02/2007
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Bumb, Renee Marie (D.N.J.)
IM-NJ-0002-9000
Donio, Ann Marie (D.N.J.)
IM-NJ-0002-9000
Plaintiff's Lawyers Pena, Jesus J. (New Jersey)
IM-NJ-0002-0004 | IM-NJ-0002-9000
Sanchez Calderon, William J. (Florida)
IM-NJ-0002-0001 | IM-NJ-0002-0003 | IM-NJ-0002-0004
Defendant's Lawyers Heinhold, Douglas L. (New Jersey)
IM-NJ-0002-0002 | IM-NJ-0002-9000
Saponaro, George R. (New Jersey)
IM-NJ-0002-0005 | IM-NJ-0002-9000

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -