Posted on 12/22/2014 9:14:43 AM PST by Hostage
Edited on 12/22/2014 9:20:27 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
WASHINGTON (AP) - A federal judge seems skeptical of a lawsuit that seeks to halt President Barack Obama's immigration plan to spare nearly 5 million people from deportation.
U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell heard arguments Monday in a case brought by an Arizona sheriff who claims the program will let more illegal immigrants enter the country and commit crimes, burdening law enforcement.
(Excerpt) Read more at myfoxatlanta.com ...
Abbot's 24+ state lawsuit is much stronger and there's also a similar Motion for Preliminary Injunction before Judge Hanen in Southern Texas Federal Court.
Arpaio can refile in Arizona.
Things are heating up.
so, as usual, the lower courts will be split, and the Supreme rulers will let the executive branch do whatever they hell they want to, regardless of the laws passed and signed. It’s good to be the king.
Sheriff Joe can still begin pulling over Federal Vehicles and impounding them and siezing them under CURRENT Civil Asset Forfeiture laws. Just claim they are using the vehicles in a conspiracy to violate the immigration laws of the United States. Never arrest or charge them, they really have no chance of getting their property back, just like Ordinary Citizens.
Bloomberg breaks the news too with a little more detail:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-12-22/obama-immigration-suit-by-sheriff-finds-judge-skeptic.html
> “Based on legal decisions federal court in Washington regarding harm from third parties, “you’ve got a big problem with standing,” she told Larry Klayman, a lawyer for Arpaio.”
Having read the excellent reply filed Friday by Klayman in regards to ‘Standing’, I would say to the judge “YOU’VE GOT A BIG PROBLEM WITH FOLLOWING THE LAW!”.
Here’s Klayman’s reply for Arpaio:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/250527960/14-cv-01966-Document19-12-18-14
Direct argument for Standing starts on page 11.
But it won’t matter. This case will be dismissed. Good news is the ruling will be based on Standing and not on the elements that underly a motion for injunction. That means it cannot be used in other cases where Standing is granted.
This is just the first skirmish.
No split. This pertains to standing only. Another federal court that should grant standing will not be conflicted with this case because there is no ruling in this case regards to the injunction.
Under the Supreme Court decision known as Kelo, the “State” has the Legal Authority to sieze property through eminent domain for “economic benefit”. Since Obama’s new dictates are going to have a direct COST UPON THE STATE, begin Eminent Domain Siezure proceedings on all Federal Properties within the State, then go after Federal Employees Property. This case has already been Decided in Favor of the State, they can do NOTHING about it.
Arapaio should let the rubber hit the road.
(1) He should sue the malpractice insurance companies of any lawyer representing illegals and/or advising them on ways to contravene US law.
(2) Mobilizing the Bank Secrecy act should also be considered-----to determine who exactly is aiding and abetting crimes against the state by funding these felons.
(3) Lawyers who attempt to bring to court clients "w/ unclean hands" (a legal term meaning those who committed crimes) should be reported to the state's Bar Association....and considered for disbarment.
Mark Levin has admonished his audience for years to understand that we cannot rely on the courts or congress to restore liberty.
Does Beryl’s groin tingle for Obama? Apparently. I am impressed at some of the legal comments in this thread. We have a few FReepers who could do a better job as governor than Jan Brewer has. The seizing of federal properties is mighty powerful tool.
Yeah, most federal judges are apparently skeptical these days of anything that represents a Constitutional Republic.
Judge Hanen in Texas for the Abbott 24+ State Lawsuit is the exact opposite of this liberal Judge Howell in DC.
Mark is correct but in this case there is no other ‘timely’ way to stop the amnesty process unless Congress does so at the end of February and you know they won’t.
There is another motion for Preliminary Injunction before Judge Hanen in Texas right now. I am busy tracking down the hearing date which I expect will be soon.
An interesting sidenote: a lawsuit filed by border agents in Texas in 2012 against DACA which was the trial balloon to what Obama is going now, that lawsuit made a big impression to the Judge who became very sympathetic but whose hands were tied because the agents as federal employees had to first go through the Personnel Review Board. They’ve been fighting there ever since and my information is they are making headway.
As far as this Arpaio case, Klayman was simply unlucky that he drew a judge who is deep inside the Leftist camp of Obama. There are other DC judges who are much more objective, neither right nor left as they should be.
There’s also a few more sheriffs that are preparing to file for the same reason, to stop the actions based on the Johnson memo. We can be sure their lawyers are learning from this hearing and taking note.
The good news is this Preliminary Injunction here was not denied as it was never considered. This Judge will dismiss based on standing alone so this action has no bearing on any case where standing is granted. So there will be no ‘Split’.
I was NOT surprised to see this case dismissed but I am very confident other cases will go forward.
This whole affair is just heating up.
This is the same a$$hole judge that demanded the wolves in the Great Lakes states be put back on the endangered species list. Of note is the fact that her husband makes animal-rights phony films for National Geographic.
The Great Lakes wolves aren’t endangered, not even close. The population has exploded and they are a major problem.
If they will eat liberals I’m all for it!
Leftist activist, probably in a bearded marriage to hide the lesbianism.
The face alone reeks of hate.
The democrats have been corrupting the courts system for years with these political judges. We just just had an extreme round of them being positioned by the senate. It seems that we have no protection against them. They override every other part of the system of our government. We need to find a way to deal with the problem.
They don’t, they are eating livestock, pets, hunting dogs, and all the wildlife.
Especially if those Federal properties are not specifically enumerated in the US Constitution, Article I, Section 8: "Forts, Arsenals, Magazines, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.