Anti-Crowding Law Repealed

So in December, the city narrowed its definition of family in order to break up more households by forcing out extended relatives such as nephews and cousins -- whom one city official described as "peripheral." Using the new definition, the city calculated that it could relocate about 100 more people.

A city inspector who has been enforcing the program said the image of dozens of people living in squalor did not fit what his inspections turned up in Manassas. Although complaints occasionally led him to houses crammed with too many people, most of the time inspections turned up neat and orderly homes of perhaps eight extended relatives living together to help with the high cost of housing.

Although some legal experts thought that the ordinance could withstand a court challenge, others were skeptical and pointed to a 1977 Supreme Court ruling that struck down a similar law in East Cleveland, Ohio, on the grounds that it violated 14th Amendment protections of privacy and family, among other reasons.

Civil rights groups -- including the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia, the Equal Rights Center, the Washington Lawyers Committee and Housing Opportunities Made Equal -- lined up to challenge the rule in court or asked the Department of Justice to investigate.

Kent Willis, executive director of the ACLU of Virginia, said, "If nothing else, other communities will know that there are some limits on what they can do when they try to target immigrant populations."

At a council meeting Monday night, dozens of residents packed City Hall, including many who urged the council not to cave in to pressure from "outsiders."

"The opinions of those outside are gratuitous and irrelevant," one man said. "The ACLU does not care about the citizens of Manassas. All they care about is their radical, secularist, left-wing agenda."

But the outsider label did not apply to the dozens of local Latino residents who turned out Monday night to demonstrate their opposition to the ordinance, having heard about the issue on a Latino radio station.

Fewer people came to last night's meeting, in which the council discussed the ordinance and the possible litigation in a closed session. One of those was Alejandro Miguel.

"I'm happy," he said of the city's decision. "I felt it was unfair. I just came here to work."