Depending on how the matter is resolved, there could be a number of implications for future litigation. The law license of Sergio Garcia, in the meantime, hangs in the balance.
Gonzalez (D-San Diego) proposed a bill (A.B. 1024) to specifically allow undocumented immigrants to apply for, and receive, a law license in the state so long as the applicant has met the appropriate criteria.
While Gonzalez is seeking a direct remedy for the case of Garcia, an undocumented immigrant whose license application is being reviewed by the California Supreme Court, advocates have argued he should be eligible for admission regardless of the pending California statute sponsored by Gonzalez.
The State Bar of California Committee of Bar Examiners determined that Garcia, who is awaiting an immigration visa, has met the eligibility for a law license. The members then informed the Supreme Court of his immigration status. The Court has since issued an Order of Show Cause to the Committee to determine why a law license should be granted. The U.S. DOJ has argued that Garcia is ineligible.
The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 restricts “public benefits for aliens,” including “any grant, contract, loan, professional license, or commercial license provided by an agency of the United States or by appropriated funds of the United States.”
Gonzalez said state law can “explicitly” override the 1996 federal Act. California Gov. Jerry Brown has not yet signed A.B. 1024 into law.
“AB 1024 completes the promise we’ve made to DREAMers who have worked hard, studied hard, passed the Bar exam and now just want the right to make a living for themselves as an attorney,” she said, referring to the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act in her verbiage.
However, arguments made in favor of granting Garcia a law license enumerate interpretations of existing statute that already allows for Garcia to be able to practice.
The Amicus Curiae Brief of Joseph A. Vail Center for Immigrant Rights points out California laws already on the books indicate the state Legislature intended for undocumented immigrants to be able to receive law licenses since they allow for applicants to provide a federal taxpayer identification number when no Social Security number has been issued to the applicant.
“This affirmative step by California Legislators to allow the committee of Bar Examiners to accept registration for a federal taxpayer identification number in lieu of a Social Security number was aimed at allowing undocumented students like Sergio … to apply and be admitted to the California Bar,” the brief states.
Further, the Committee of Bar Examiners of the State Bar of California’s Opening Brief on the Merits, filed in June of last year, argues the Supreme Court has the ultimate say in the granting of legal licenses, and the Supreme Court is not an “agency “ of the government, but a co-equal branch of the government in California. It also notes no special fund has been set aside or “appropriated” for the granting of law licenses, as per the language in the 1996 Reconciliation Act.
A ruling from the Supreme Court to grant Garcia the license or the passage of A.B. 1024 would both seemingly allow for Garcia to practice law in California. However, according to information from the American Immigration Council’s website, the DOJ has taken a similar stance in another case in Florida, yielding speculation about the federal government’s motivation to interject into the California and Florida cases.
A favorable ruling for Garcia might alter the DOJ approach in other states, but the AIC wonders why the issue was raised in the first place.
“Garcia is precisely the type of person the Obama Administration has been urging deserves an opportunity to obtain lawful status and get on a path to citizenship. So why would DOJ oppose his application for a law license?” a Legal Action Center post on the website posits.
Dan Sabbatino is an award winning journalist whose accolades include a New York Press Association award for a series of articles he wrote dealing with a small upstate town’s battle over the implications of letting a “big-box” retailer locate within its borders. He has worked as a reporter and editor since 2007 primarily covering state and local politics for a number of Capital Region publications, including The Legislative Gazette.