A federal appeals panel Wednesday upheld a ban on a California law that would reduce welfare payments for new residents who move here from other states, despite Gov. Pete Wilson's warnings that California would become a welfare magnet.
The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals let stand a lower court ruling that blocked California's attempt to cut public aid for new residents during their first 12 months in the state.
In a separate ruling made public this week, a state appeals panel upheld another one of Wilson's long-term welfare objectives and cleared the way for California to end state-subsidized pregnancy care for 70,000 illegal immigrant women.
Wilson has argued that the 1996 federal welfare overhaul specifically authorized states to ban most aid for illegal immigrants and to place special restrictions on benefits for new residents arriving from other states.
But the three-judge federal panel found that a lower court "did not abuse its discretion" in granting a preliminary injunction barring benefits for new state residents.
In his June 4 ruling, U.S. District Judge David F. Levi in Sacramento repudiated Wilson's contention that welfare payments act as a magnet for poor migrants. In addition, the judge called the California law a violation of the constitutional doctrine that states cannot discriminate against citizens based on their states of origin or their length of residency in their adopted states.
Civil libertarians hailed Wednesday's ruling, saying that it will discourage other states from attempting to erect similar barriers.
"This upholds the principle that California cannot detach itself from the rest of the nation," said Mark Rosenbaum, who argued the case for the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California. "It means the governor is going to have to take down the fence he wants to keep out poor women."
Martha Davis, legal director of the NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund, called the decision a "landmark" that was crucial for women fleeing domestic abuse who move across state lines to avoid stalking and violence.
Wilson, who contended that reduced benefits to newcomers would save the state's taxpayers about $13.5 million a year, assailed the court's decision. He voiced hope that the Supreme Court would hear the case.
"California has among the highest welfare benefits in the nation," said Wilson, who repeated that the disputed law "avoids making California a welfare magnet."
