About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

6 Calif. L. Rev. Circuit 1 (2015)

handle is hein.journals/callro6 and id is 1 raw text is: 











    California Law Review Circuit


    Vol. 6                                                    January 2015
                    Copyright (© 2015 by California Law Review, Inc.


   No State Power: Critiquing the Eighth

   Circuit's Preemption Analysis in Keller

                     v. City of Fremont


                           Meghan Harrington*


                                 INTRODUCTION
     In Keller v. City of Fremont, the Eighth Circuit overturned the U.S.
District Court for the District of Nebraska, finding that federal law did not
preempt   a  municipal housing     ordinance  that  prevents  undocumented
immigrants from renting property anywhere in the City of Fremont.' I contend
that the Eighth Circuit erred in its application of preemption doctrine. The
Third, Fifth, and Eleventh Circuits have all overturned housing provisions
similar to Fremont's. Although the Supreme Court denied certiorari to review
                       2
Keller H in May 2014, the conflict among the circuits' preemption analyses
remains and must be resolved.3 The Supreme Court should rectify the
preemption analysis in Keller H by resolving the circuit split, applying the
Third, Fifth, and Eleventh Circuits' application of preemption doctrine to local
laws that restrict the ability of immigrants to reside in certain locations. Such
laws are inconsistent with federal immigration policy and invade the exclusive

    *    J.D. Candidate, 2015, UC Berkeley School of Law; B.A., University of Colorado, Boulder.
    1.   Keller v. City of Fremont, 719 F.3d 931 (8th Cir. 2013) [hereinafter Keller 1]. While there
is a compelling argument to be made that the Fremont Ordinance and others like it are unconstitutional
on Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection grounds, this Note is limited to a critique of the
preemption analysis in Keller I.
    2.   Id, cert. denied, 134 S. Ct. 2140 (2014).
    3.   Since its decision in Arizona, the U.S. Supreme Court has denied certiorari in Keller IL
Lozano v. City of Hazleton, 724 F.3d 297 (3d Cir. 2013) [hereinafter Lozano III], and Villas at
Parkside Partners v. City of Farmers Branch, 726 F.3d 524 (5th Cir. 2013) (en banc) [hereinafter
Farmers Branch], despite the circuits' conflicting interpretations of Arizona as applied to immigration
preemption analysis.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 3,000 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline with pricing starting as low as $29.95

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most