Martin Escobar v. Jan Brewer

Good Law
461 F. App'x 535
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 1, 201110-16946California378 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

The district court dismissed this case on the ground that plaintiff-Appellant Esco-bar lacks standing to bring his challenges to Arizona’s 2010 immigration law known as S.B. 1070. On appeal, Escobar contends: (1) that he has standing as a police officer “mandated to enforce S.B. 1070,”; (2) that he has standing to challenge the law as a “Hispanic residing in Arizona,”; and (3) in the alternative, the court should have granted Escobar leave to amend his complaint. All of these contentions fail, and we affirm the district court in all respects.

Escobar contends that “if he refuses to enforce the Act, he can be disciplined by his employer or subjected to costly enforcement actions,” but if he enforces it he “can be subjected to costly civil actions alleging the deprivation of civil rights of the individual against whom he enforces the Act.” This theory of standing is foreclosed by this court’s decision in City of S. Lake Tahoe v. Cal. Tahoe Reg’l Planning Agency, 625 F.2d 231 (9th Cir.1980), which is directly on point.

Nor does Escobar have standing to challenge S.B. 1070 as a “Hispanic residing in Arizona,” since he has alleged insufficient facts in his complaint that…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.