The ACLU is now fighting 7 loitering charges stemming from arrests made near Coverstone. The names of 3 more Latinos have been added to the already existing request for charges to be dropped.
According to the Washington Post:
“We have two problems here,” said Rebecca Glenberg, legal director of the ACLU of Virginia. “One is that there appears to be a pattern of using this ordinance to target the Latino community, and two, the loitering ordinance [overall] is unconstitutional.”
It was the second time in four weeks the ACLU has acted on behalf of Latinos in the county. A similar motion to dismiss loitering charges filed last month on behalf of four men stated that the county’s loitering ordinance is unconstitutional. Both motions are set to go before a Prince William General District Court judge Oct. 27.
This appears to be a wait and see situation. The 3 men live in Coverstone Apartments. Their attorney, Daniel Voss, reported that the men were doing nothing wrong and were standing outside the complex on a grassy area. However, something seems odd:
All the men were released after the incidents. If, however, they had been detained in the jail, they would have been questioned about their immigration status under Prince William’s agreement with federal immigration authorities, said Voss, who would not comment on whether the men are in the United States legally.
Is that how the Resolution works? Isn’t a person’s status checked post arrest? Does a person have to be jailed to have status checked? I must not have understood the Resolution after all–or are the men arrested legal residents?
