Federal judge slaps hold on new Oklahoma immigration law
A federal judge in Oklahoma has put a two-week hold on a 2024 state law coming into force that criminalizes illegal immigrants living in the state, a decision that was welcomed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) but drew a strong rebuke from the state's attorney general, who blasted the decision as "outrageous."
Federal District Judge Bernard Jones on Tuesday ruled that House Bill 4156 may not be enforced for at least 14 days while a court challenge proceeds.
The law creates the crime of "impermissible occupation" and empowers state and local law enforcement officers to arrest immigrants suspected of being in the U.S. illegally.
A first offense under the law is a misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in jail and a fine of $500, and a second offense is a felony that could result in up to two years in prison. The law also requires a person to leave the state within 72 hours of conviction or release from custody.
The bill was signed into law in April 2024 but was held up from taking force due to a lawsuit filed by the Biden administration challenging its constitutionality in that it violates the federal government's immigration authority, which led to a pause in enforcement.
However, the new Trump Justice Department decided to drop the federal government's case in March.
That led to two unnamed undocumented immigrants and the ACLU representing a local advocacy group filing a new lawsuit, which prompted Jones to issue another temporary injunction on Tuesday.
Jones said that their case is likely to succeed in court, adding that he will consider a longer-term injunction of the law after a court hearing in early June.
Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond blasted the delayed enforcement, writing on X that "it is outrageous that Oklahoma is once again prohibited from enforcement of HB 4156."
He said it was critical to the state's efforts to shut down illegal marijuana grows, fentanyl distribution and other illegal activities.
Drummond also blasted the judge for allowing the case to proceed despite two of the plaintiffs being anonymous because to reveal their identities would "expos(e) them to federal authorities" for federal lawbreaking, he said, quoting the judge.
"In the name of federal law, the court is protecting admitted lawbreakers from federal and state consequences," Drummond said in a statement. "This is perverse, contrary to the rule of law and we will be evaluating all options for challenging the ruling."
Tamya Cox-Touré, the executive director for the ACLU of Oklahoma, said the decision was a victory for immigrants' rights.
"But the damage of HB 4156 and the national rhetoric repeated by local politicians has already created an environment of fear in our state," Cox-Touré said. No matter what someone looks like, sounds like, or what their immigration status may be, they should feel safe in their own communities. We will continue to fight for the rights and dignity of immigrants and their families."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
1.5 million signature petition to ban fur imports delivered to PM
A 1.5 million signature petition to ban fur imports and sales has been handed in at Downing Street. Newport West and Islwyn MP, Ruth Jones, delivered the document with support from animal protection groups and celebrities Will Young and Pete Wicks. The petition, which gained backing from Humane World for Animals UK, RSPCA, PETA, FOUR PAWS UK and Open Cages, supports Ms Jones's bill set for its second reading on June 13, aiming to halt fur imports into the UK. Ms Jones said: "If passed into law, my bill would end the UK's complicity in the cruelty of the global fur trade. "I am delighted today to join #FurFreeBritain campaigners to deliver more than 1.5 million petition signatures to show the Prime Minister how much support there is for this legislation." Fur farming was banned in the UK over 20 years ago, yet fur worth £30-£40 million is still imported annually. The bill proposes extending bans on trade from cats, dogs, and seals to include foxes, raccoon dogs, mink, chinchilla, and coyotes. The bill has substantial public backing, with 77 per cent supporting a fur import ban.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Migrants flown to El Salvador under Alien Enemies Act must be allowed to challenge their removal, federal judge rules
A group of migrants the Trump administration sent to a mega-prison in El Salvador earlier this year must now have an opportunity to challenge their removal under the Alien Enemies Act, a federal judge ruled Wednesday. The ruling from US District Judge James Boasberg said that US officials had 'improperly' loaded the migrants on to flights in mid-March and sent them to El Salvador's CECOT prison without giving them a chance to challenge their designation as 'alien enemies' subject to President Donald Trump's use of the sweeping 18th century wartime law. As a result, Boasberg wrote, officials must find a way to 'facilitate' the migrants' 'ability to proceed through habeas and ensure that their cases are handled as they would have been if the Government had not provided constitutionally inadequate process.' The ruling came the same afternoon it was acknowledged that a migrant in a separate case hastily deported to Mexico was returned to the US by the Trump administration. Earlier this year the Supreme Court, without deciding whether Trump had properly invoked the Alien Enemies Act, said officials must give migrants targeted under it a chance to contest their removal through so-called habeas petitions. 'Absent this relief, the Government could snatch anyone off the street, turn him over to a foreign country, and then effectively foreclose any corrective course of action,' Boasberg wrote. Several hundred Venezuelan migrants were sent to CECOT in mid-March after Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act. 'The court made clear that the Trump administration cannot decline to remedy blatant constitutional violations and leave these men in a foreign gulag, maybe incommunicado for the fear of their lives,' said ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt. Boasberg, the chief judge of the trial-level federal court in Washington, DC, was critical in his ruling of the administration's actions earlier this year, particularly given the fact that information that emerged after the flights occurred undermined the government's claims that the migrants were members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. 'Perhaps the President lawfully invoked the Alien Enemies Act. Perhaps, moreover, Defendants are correct that Plaintiffs are gang members. But — and this is the critical point — there is simply no way to know for sure, as the CECOT Plaintiffs never had any opportunity to challenge the Government's say-so,' the judge wrote. He continued: 'Defendants instead spirited away planeloads of people before any such challenge could be made. And now, significant evidence has come to light indicating that many of those currently entombed in CECOT have no connection to the gang and thus languish in a foreign prison on flimsy, even frivolous, accusations.' This story has been updated with additional developments.
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Iowa ACLU sends letters to cities calling for removal of drag restrictions
Students got signatures and pictures with drag queens who spoke at Iowa Safe Schools' Annual Governor's Conference on LGBTQ Youth April 28, 2023 at Prairie Meadows in Altoona. (Photo by Robin Opsahl/Iowa Capital Dispatch) The American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa sent letters Wednesday to five Iowa city councils calling for a change to local statutes that classify 'female impersonators' and 'male impersonators' as adult entertainment, saying such measures are unconstitutional. The letters were sent to the city councils of Carroll, Harlan, Mt. Pleasant, Polk City and Webster City. The five Iowa municipalities have restrictions on performances — typically referring to drag shows — as adult entertainment. In the letters to the city councils, ACLU Staff Attorney Shefali Aurora wrote that the prohibitions on drag performances violate the state and U.S. constitutions, as they conflict with the First Amendment by restricting a form of expression that's protected under free speech rights. Aurora also argued the ordinances violate constitutional equal protection rights, as the measures target the LGBTQ community on the basis of sex and gender expression. Aurora said in a news conference Wednesday the ordinances are restricting performances that are neither obscene or sexual. 'Not all drag is obscenity,' Aurora said. 'A lot of drag performances are, in fact, family friendly. Too often, drag is equated with sexualized performances. But drag is not, by definition, adult entertainment. It can simply be someone wearing clothing and accessories conventionally worn by a person of a different gender.' Other performances that entail stories involving a person dressed in a manner that does not traditionally correspond with their gender at birth — such as movies like 'Mulan' or 'Mrs. Doubtfire' — could be restricted from being shown under such local ordinances. A statewide measure to ban minors' attendance at drag performances was discussed during the 2025 legislative session but ultimately did not advance. This proposed legislation contained similar language that defined drag as performances where the main aspect is 'a performer who exhibits a gender identity that is different than the performer's gender assigned at birth through the use of clothing, makeup, accessories, or other gender signifiers.' The bill, which was amended, received heavy criticism not just for limiting family-friendly drag shows but potentially impacting transgender people's ability to be in non-drag public performances and preventing local theaters from performing classic art such as Shakespeare's 'Twelfth Night,' as it contains a character that dresses as the opposite gender. Aurora said this is not the first time the ACLU has sent letters to local governments about similar anti-drag ordinances. In the past, the organization has contacted Eagle Grove, Knoxville, Newton, Dyersville, Pella, Waukee and Grinnell — communities that agreed to amend their ordinances after receiving communications from the ACLU on the issue. In 2021, Doña Martha's Office in Eagle Grove had canceled a drag show after receiving a letter from the city attorney that called for the performances to cease, claiming they violated municipal code. Aurora said Eagle Grove later agreed to amend the restriction on 'female impersonators' as part of the city's definition of adult entertainment. While the ACLU is encouraging all cities to review their ordinances and remove language related to drag performances as inherently obscene, Aurora said the latest letters were sent as many Iowa communities are celebrating Pride month, holding events that sometimes host drag performances. 'We thought it was particularly important to raise this issue again this month, with it being Pride, which is why we're sending out the letters this week, just to bring that to the forefront,' Aurora said.
