There's some typical Times labeling bias in Saturday's piece by Julia Preston on illegalimmigration, "Pennsylvania Town Delays Enforcing Tough New Immigration Law [1]."
"The suit, brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, charged that the ordinance was 'riddled with constitutional flaws,' overstepped the bounds of municipal authority and would discriminate against any residents who appeared to be foreigners. Several plaintiffs are Hazleton landlords who are legal Hispanic immigrants."
Later on, these two liberal activist groups are given a flattering label: "The order by Judge Munley, who sits in Scranton, Pa., gives the civil liberties groups 20 days to renew their challenge to any immigration ordinance Hazleton adopts."
By contrast, those insisting on cracking down on illegal immigration are called "tough," both in the headline and the story text: "According to a tally on Monday by the Puerto Rican legal group, six other towns nationwide have adopted similarly tough ordinances: four in Pennsylvania, plus Riverside, N.J., and Valley Park, Mo."
What would have inaccurate about simply saying "six other towns nationwide have adopted similar ordinances..."?