Anderson
v.
Los Angeles County
Dept. of Health Services

[a layperson's guide to the suit and the issue]


	Title Page

I	Index

II	Introduction

III	Procedural elements

IV	Legal Basis for Claim

V	Petitioner's argument

VI	Prayer for Relief

TEXT OF
OPENING BRIEF
AS FILED
CAL SUPERIOR COURT
LOS ANGELES
JULY 19, 2002
(PRINT)

I. Index

II. Introduction

Petitioner, a taxpayer, seeks a writ of mandate compelling respondent, a public service provider, to seek reimbursement from the sponsors of legal immigrants as required by state and federal law for certain public services such immigrants may consume.

III. Procedural Elements

IV. Legal Basis for Claim

A. Congress has authority over immigration law

B. Federal Law

1. Congress has made "public charge" immigrants inadmissible and/or deportable

2. "Affidavit of support" meant to enforce safeguards against immigrant public charges

3. Means-tested public benefit defined

4. Public entities shall seek reimbursement for means-tested public benefits improperly used

C. Judicial authority

1. To compel local compliance with federal law

2. To enforce terms of affidavit of support

D. State law

1. Statutory duty

2. California constitution

V. Petitioner's Argument

A. Respondent in violation of 8 USC 1183a

B. Compliance with 8 USC 1183a recognized as necessary and desirable

C. Respondent's failure to comply with 8 USC 1183a causing harm

1. Causing financial harm to petitioner

2. Encouraging illegal behavior

3. Betrayal of the public trust

D. Respondent in violation of state law

E. Respondent has an affirmative duty to comply

1. By federal law

2. By state law

F. In practice, respondent's current policies preclude compliance

1. Accurate, accessible, and substantial record keeping recognized as intrinsic to immigration law enforcement

2. Respondent's failure to keep records evidence of bad faith

VI. Prayer for Relief

A. Writ of mandate

1. Seek reimbursement

2. Collect necessary data

3. Open to scrutiny

B. Attorney's fees, costs, other relief deemed appropriate

I. Index

II. Introduction

Petitioner, a taxpayer, seeks a writ of mandate compelling respondent, a public service provider, to seek reimbursement from the sponsors of legal immigrants as required by state and federal law for certain public services such immigrants may consume.

III. Procedural Elements

IV. Legal Basis for Claim

A. Congress has authority over immigration law

B. Federal Law

1. Congress has made "public charge" immigrants inadmissible and/or deportable 2. "Affidavit of support" meant to enforce safeguards against immigrant public charges 3. Means-tested public benefit defined 4. Public entities shall seek reimbursement for means-tested public benefits improperly used

C. Judicial authority

1. To compel local compliance with federal law

2. To enforce terms of affidavit of support

D. State law

1. Statutory duty

2. California constitution

V. Petitioner's Argument

A. Respondent in violation of 8 USC 1183a

B. Compliance with 8 USC 1183a recognized as necessary and desirable

C. Respondent's failure to comply with 8 USC 1183a causing harm

1. Causing financial harm to petitioner

2. Encouraging illegal behavior

3. Betrayal of the public trust

D. Respondent in violation of state law

E. Respondent has an affirmative duty to comply

1. By federal law

2. By state law

F. In practice, respondent's current policies preclude compliance

1. Accurate, accessible, and substantial record keeping recognized as intrinsic to immigration law enforcement

2. Respondent's failure to keep records evidence of bad faith

VI. Prayer for Relief

A. Writ of mandate

1. Seek reimbursement

2. Collect necessary data

3. Open to scrutiny

B. Attorney's fees, costs, other relief deemed appropriate