The federal legal services program has developed a reputation
for filing ideologically-motivated litigation that often borders on the
ludicrous. The following is a compilation of cases from the last five years
detailed in previous issues of LSAP reports.
LSC Grantees Sue California for Denying Drivers Licenses to Illegal Aliens
Recently, two LSC grantees sued California’s Department of Motor Vehicles
for refusing to issue drivers’ licenses to illegal aliens. As required
by law, the DMV requires that all applicants provide proof of legal residency
to obtain licenses and registration. However, the National Immigration
Law Center and California Rural Legal Assistance saw fit to sue the DMV
on behalf of several illegal aliens who had their applications rejected.
The attorneys took the position that even if their presence in the United
States is unlawful they are still entitled to a driver’s license. A state
appeals court didn’t buy the argument and ruled that the “DMV is not only
authorized but obligated” to deny licenses to illegal aliens.
See Lauderbach v. Zolin, 35 Cal. App. 4th 578, May 30, 1995
Hospital Criticized for Frightening Illegal Aliens With Uniforms
In 1991, Texas Rural Legal Aid threatened to sue a hospital in McAllen,
Texas because its security guards wore uniforms resembling those of Border
Patrol Agents. Legal services said this was discriminatory against illegals
because it discouraged them from seeking care. Hospital spokesmen denied
the charge and pointed out that that they provided $14 million in uncompensated
care in 1989 alone. Hospital officials added that if they really wanted
to discourage illegals from seeking services, they would charge for parking
like other hospitals.
See Modern Healthcare, December 17, 1990 and January 28, 1991
Legal Services Demands Disability for Habitual Criminal
In 1994, the Legal Assistance Foundation of Chicago sued the federal
government demanding social security disability benefits for a man who
admitted to making a living from crime. Legal Aid’s client, one Jimmie
Jones, freely admitted that he robbed people and stole cars to support
his $60 a day drug habit. Jones, who had been arrested more than 100 times
in his life, also received welfare. Nevertheless, Legal Assistance argued
that even though Jones could support himself through illegal “gainful activity,”
he was still incapable of finding legal gainful employment. The judge in
the case ruled that if Jones could make a living from a life of crime,
he was certainly capable of earning a living from legal employment.
See Jones v. Shalala, 21 F.3d 191 (US App. Ct.) 1994
Homeless Go On $400,000 Drug and Drinking Binge
In 1991, the Legal Aid Society of Orange County won $400,000 from the
city of Santa Ana for more than 30 homeless persons as compensation for
supposed suffering they experienced when police forcibly removed them from
the grounds of the city civic center. Despite the fact that the vast majority
of the homeless plaintiffs were drug addicts and alcoholics, the settlement
Legal Aid lawyers worked out simply gave each homeless person $11,000 without
any requirements that they get counseling for their maladies. The predictable
result was a wild binge of drunkenness, drug use and outlandish squandering
of money. One homeless person said he used his money to treat his friends
to a night on the town in a limo and looking for all the drugs his money
could buy. Another also admitted to “cruisin” in a luxury care with friends
and getting drunk. One man who fared better than the rest said he found
a nice apartment with a jacuzzi but says he still drinks and has no intention
of getting a job. Within months, of the 31 homeless plaintiffs who received
damage awards, 11 were homeless again, several were running out of money
and some had simply disappeared. Only 9 were legitimately trying to turn
their lives around. All Legal Aid lawyers had to say was that the homeless
were entitled to use the money as they saw fit.
See Gebe Martinez, “Money Didn’t Buy Them Happiness,” Los Angeles
Times, Dec. 2, 1991, pg. A1
Ohio Jail Forced to Release Thousands of Prisoners
Between 1992 and 1994, the Legal Aid Society of Lorain County forced
the Lorain County Jail to prematurely release more than 3500 criminals
to avoid what Legal Aid defined as overcrowding. In 1994, Legal Aid also
filed suit against the Lorain City jail for violating prisoners’ constitutional
rights. They contended that housing 45 inmates in a jail designed for 39
constituted cruel and unusual punishment under the 8th Amendment. Among
the other violations cited by Legal Aid were: poor laundry services; life-threatening
levels of tobacco smoke; and inadequate recreational facilities. They specifically
cited the fact that the pingpong table had no paddles.
See Stephen Hudak, “Inmate Sues Over Conditions,” The Plain
Dealer, September 2, 1994, pg. 6B; “Elyria to House Inmates,” The Plain
Dealer, January 21, 1993, pg. 1B
Legal Services Files Baseless Discrimination Suit
East Texas Legal Services sued the city of Beaumont seeking damages for several black officers who alleged discrimination in the department’s disciplinary and promotion policies. However, a federal court ruled in favor of the Beaumont Police Department because of the comically baseless allegations of East Texas’ clients. For instance, one of the former officers complained that his being fired for shoplifting at a 7-11 was unfair and racially motivated. The court rejected another officer’s claim that he was wrongly denied promotion to a S.W.A.T. team on account of race when it was brought to light he couldn’t shoot straight -- an essential skill in this elite unit.
See Martin v. City of Beaumont, B-87-1076 (US App.
Ct.) 1992