.......hmmm...........I think some of these women that are being groped and raped by muzzies of all stripes would disagree with Godbey on the definition of “irreparable harm.
IMPEACH THE JUDGE
Why are not TEXANs in the streets? I’m curious?- just fat and sassy?
Our nation is sliding down the crapper.
Remember that next time you want to “compromise” with the people doing it. :)
Judge David Godbey, you aren’t related to certain Antonio López de Santa Anna by any chance are you?
Have Texas ban them anyway.
And what will this POS judge do if his “orders” are ignored?
Nothing, that’s right, NOTHING. Screw these self serving assholes!
Time to do a big wipeout of feral judges.
”. . . have not shown Texas would suffer irreparable harm.”
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponents Argument
With all due respect to the judge, I wonder what law school he got indoctrinated at? (Ouch! Evidently Harvard Law School. Corrections welcome.)
The problem with the politically correct question of irreparable harm is this. The question has nothing to do with the federal governments constitutionally limited powers.
More specifically, judges and attorneys are evidently not trained to first go the federal governments constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers to find a clause which reasonably justifies the action of the feds being challenged. Although Section 8s ”Uniform Rule of Naturalization” clause (1.8.4) looks interesting in this case, please note the following.
Politically correct interpretations of the ”Uniform Rule of Naturalization” clause aside, interpretations used to justify federal immigration laws, please note the following. Both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, Madison generally regarded as the father of the Constitution, had written that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate immigration, such power being unique, 10th Amendment-protected state power. This is evidence by the excerpts below.
Here is the relevant excerpt from Jeffersons writings.
” 4. _Resolved_, That alien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the State wherein they are: that no power over them has been delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the individual States, distinct from their power over citizens. And it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that ”the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,” the act of the Congress of the United States, passed on the - day of July, 1798, intituled ”An Act concerning aliens,” which assumes powers over alien friends, not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void, and of no force [emphasis added].” - Thomas Jefferson, Draft of the Kentucky Resolutions - October 1798.
And here is the related excerpt from the writings of James Madison in Virginia Resolutions.
”That the General Assembly doth particularly protest against the palpable and alarming infractions of the Constitution, in the two late cases of the ”Alien and Sedition Acts” passed at the last session of Congress; the first of which exercises a power no where delegated to the federal government, . . .. . .
. . . the General Assembly doth solemenly appeal to the like dispositions of the other states, in confidence that they will concur with this commonwealth in declaring, as it does hereby declare, that the acts aforesaid, are unconstitutional; and that the necessary and proper measures will be taken by each, for co-operating with this state, in maintaining the Authorities, Rights, and Liberties, referred to the States respectively, or to the people [emphasis added]. ”- James Madison, Draft of the Virginia Resolutions - December 1798.
Good. Send them to his home town.
Wow, we sure have a bunch of communists judges to kick off the bench.
In the article it says that they haven’t shown Texas would have irreparable harm , but the refugees are able to get housing subsidies, social security health care and more benefits.
It also says that the refugees pose a risk but that the burden of that risk is with the federal level, not the state level.
How can that be when the states pick up many of the costs and absorb the risks just the same as with illegal immigrants?
what damn judge has the right to overrule States rights in a matter like this?
to hell with them, just because they wear black robe does not make them the ultimate authority in society. American has a right to protect itself and keep itself safe and undisturbed by spreading Islam, including sneaking in in the form of refugees. To hell with these damn judges. long ago in the Bible they were smart enough to get rid of judges, maybe we need to have another purge in these modern times. Just who the hell do they think they are?
Why again is a federal judge telling Texans what they can and cannot do?
The governor should stop it now and make the texas congress pass legislation - to hell with a U.S. district judge...
Texas needs to settle all of these “refugees” in this “judge’s” neighborhood.
It would be Interesting to see his call list for the past 30 days
Wasn’t the terrorist attack in Garland Texas a bona fida attempt to cause ‘irrepairable harm’? How much easier is it for ISIS to recruit a muslim ‘refugee’ who finds themselves overwhelmed by and unable to cope with western civilization?
“About 10 percent of U.S. Muslims told pollsters that suicide bombings can be justified in defense of Islam, said McCauley, whose research has been supported in part by the Department of Homeland Security. Half, he said, believe America’s war on terror is an assault on their religion.”
When the SHTF, charge the judge as an accessory to whatever crime the “refugee” is charged with. See how long it takes these activist judges to change their views.
So, who appointed this judge?
... I think the only way to address this is at the federal level.
These muslims hold the constitution over all others. When they come, they bring Sharia with one sole goal, to supplant the hosts constitution.
Take a look at France, Britain, Belgium . etc etc... all of them have no go zones. These no go zones? Are just where the muslims set up their enclaves, installed sharia and claimed the lands as a part of their sovereign state. So what yo have is little nodules of cancer sprouting up in the host’s country, looking to expand, permeate and then art worst , quietly vote a take over.
We need to assess them as a invasive , occupying, enemy force. They are well past “just a religion”. They are all political.
Who in their right mind (other than....BO) would knowqingly allow a enemy to just walk in and occupy land and prepare for a takeover?
That crap in europe is just a haj. A nice quiet takeover.