LOS ANGELES : Judge Explains Why She Won’t Drop Prop. 187 Case

In a four-page opinion released Thursday, a federal court judge said she has refused to bow out of the Proposition 187 case, in part because state courts cannot resolve all the legal issues stemming from lawsuits filed to thwart the illegal immigration initiative.

“A state court determination of the state issues presented by these actions would not terminate the controversy, nor would it obviate the need for a constitutional adjudication by the federal court,” wrote U.S. District Judge Mariana R. Pfaelzer, who Monday rejected a request from state attorneys that she dismiss or abstain from presiding over four lawsuits filed against the measure prior to state courts dealing with its legality.

Pfaelzer wrote that all three complex U.S. Supreme Court doctrines cited by the state in its abstention motion did not apply to the Proposition 187 case, in which civil rights lawyers have raised equal protection, federal preemption and due process issues.

One of the abstention doctrines, known as the Younger doctrine, does not apply, she wrote, because the federal court cases were filed hours prior to similar lawsuits filed in state court in San Francisco.

Another doctrine is inappropriate, she wrote, because federal judges would normally hear non-constitutional challenges such as one asserting that the measure interferes with the federal government’s jurisdiction over immigration issues.

Pfaelzer, who in December temporary blocked most sections of the initiative, has scheduled a trial no later than Sept. 5 on the legality of the measure.