FULL AGENDA PACKET_2021-05-04 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

A-B 937 Page 16 purposes and objectives of Congress'." (Arizona v. United Slate,•, supra, 567 U.S. at 399.). if so, this provision could raise a conflict preengrtion concern about the bill. Author•'e• amendments. in order to address the possible, but remote, concern dial some aspects of' the bill could raise conflict preemption concerns, the author proposes to make two clarifying alrendinews. Fist, du audtor intends to amend the bill to add the following additional Talent language, clarifying that it is the intent of the bill to be consistent with letleial law: (0 No federal staultes allil-rnatively require local orstate governments to tusil ICE with immigration enforcement. While one Ifedcr:al statute specifically addresses this issue, 8 U.S.C. s 1373, it only passively restricts local and state gownwicrus from pruhbiting the sharing of only infnination related to imm1ligration status or citizenship. Further, 8 LT.S-C- 1373 has been found by several tccleral court/ to be unconstitutional. The U.S. Supreme Count ndcd that the Tenth Anxndnx nt prohibits the federal govenuncnt from affirmatively compelling a state to enact Bows and policies, and also prevents the federal government from prohibiting aslatx; or local jurisdiction li-otn cnacung new, laws urpolicics. S'ee lfurphpv- Nar7 Colh Lgiactr AthietiAWn, H9 S Ct 1461, 1477 (2018). Applying this role from the U.S. Supreme Ceara, a mariber of federal district courts have held that 8 U.S.C. � 1373 is wrconstilutional under the Tends Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The 9" Circuit Court ofAppeaLs acknowledged this filct when it upheld the Values Act against a preemption challenge in LIS v. Califbr•nia (90' Cit. 2019) 921 F.3d 865, cent. denied, US v. Calijoraita (2020) 141 S.Ct. 124. 11 is the intent of the VISION Act to beconsislenl with federal law. Second, the author proposes to add a ,everabtlity daft e to the bill so that n, due event that any portion of the bill should be invalidated, other portions of the bill would remain in effect. This hill imposes eivil liability err public agencies and enaplrryees for vialating its provisions. Ilne general nine in Cahi irnin is that a government entity (or in employee acting within scope of enlploynienl) is in-nnune from liability unless there is a statute providing otherwise. (See (jovernment Code Section 815.) Under the Government CLtins Act, "Except as provided by stattae, .. jal public entity is not liable for in injtay, whether such nljtuy alines out ol'an let or omission of the public enlity or a public employee or any osier person." (Section K1 5 (a).) Therefore, sovercign itnununit-y is the rule, and goverritrlcntal liability is Booted to exceptions specifically ,et forth by statute- (7.uniga r. Housing Awk (1995) 41 Cal. App. 4th 82.) The Government Claims Act itself sets out exceptions to the general vile of iunnnmity. For exaniple, Section 835 provides that a gover-nnxmt entity is liabiC lot injury caused by the dangerous condition on govemment property. Section 862, which is also within the (jovenunent Claims Act, makes wVernrrn:nt entities liable tor injuries caused by pesticide use to the same extent as a private person. Also, as a general ndC a public entity is liable for an injury ceased by an act or omission of its employees who are actinL within tale ;cope of their employinent, if the act would have givat rise to it cau",c of action against that employee. (Section 815.2. ) This bill would create such a statute by providing for governmental liability. Specifically, ire bill Provides that in addition to any other sanclions, penalties, or remedies provided by law, a person may brJ[lW an action for "equitable or decbratory relief' in a coon of corupetent jurisdiction against a state or local agciiey or state or local ollicial that violates the bill's provision. It llu-tlnct: provides that a state or local agency or nllicial that violates this section is liable for acltul and general damages. and reasonable attortuy's lies, which normally would be paid by each parry and Ey"1C;&FlhhR suhjcct to recovery by the prcvailin2j3art35 514/2021