The State of California; Edmund Gerald Brown jr., Governor of California, in his Official Capacity; and Xavier Becerra, Attorney General of California, in his Official Capacity, Defendants.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
COMPLAINT This just got real folks
AG Sessions will announce the lawsuit tomorrow (3/7) at 8:05 am in Sacramento. The lawsuit is over three California laws that the Feds say violate the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution.
3. This lawsuit challenges three California statutes that reflect a deliberate effort by
California to obstruct the United States’ enforcement of federal immigration law, to
regulate private entities that seek to cooperate with federal authorities consistent with
their obligations under federal law, and to impede consultation and communication
between federal and state law enforcement officials.
4. The first statute, the “Immigrant Worker Protection Act,” Assembly Bill 450 (“AB 450”),
prohibits private employers in California from voluntarily cooperating with federal
officials who seek information relevant to immigration enforcement that occurs in places
5. The second statute, Assembly Bill 103 (“AB 103”), creates an inspection and review
scheme that requires the Attorney General of California to investigate the immigration
enforcement efforts of federal agents.
6. The third statute, Senate Bill 54 (“SB 54”), which includes the “California Values Act,
limits the ability of state and local law enforcement officers to provide the United States
with basic information about individuals who are in their custody and are subject to
federal immigration custody, or to transfer such individuals to federal immigration
7. The provisions of state law at issue have the purpose and effect of making it more
difficult for federal immigration officers to carry out their responsibilities in California.
The Supremacy Clause does not allow California to obstruct the United States’ ability to
enforce laws that Congress has enacted or to take actions entrusted to it by the
Constitution. Accordingly, the provisions at issue here are invalid.https://htv-prod-media.s3.amazonaws.com ... 389178.pdf