Judge Gonzalo Curiel US District Court Southern District of California
Posted on 04/20/2017 5:30:36 AM PDT by COBOL2Java
A federal lawsuit brought by a so-called "Dreamer" deported to Mexico has been assigned to District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel — the jurist famously attacked by then-candidate Donald Trump over his "Mexican heritage" in a separate case involving Trump University.
Judge Gonzalo Curiel US District Court Southern District of California
Juan Manuel Montes, 23, filed a complaint Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, alleging that the government did not provide any documentation explaining the legality of sending him back to Mexico. The suit seeks documents related to his case.
The case was assigned at random to Curiel, the Indiana-born judge whose impartiality was called into question by Trump last year due to what the then-candidate called Curiel's "Mexican heritage."
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
I watched a Sessions interview yesterday, and when he was asked about dreamers, he said they were concentrating on criminals but legally they can deport anyone here illegally.
[What documentation is needed to explain the legality of sending a Mexican citizen who is in our country illegally back to Mexico? Deport the criminal and bar him for life from reentry into our country.]
DHS/DOJ should enact the following border control policy:
1) For your first illegal invasion offense, offenders are deported across the border via an ICE bus.
2) Second or subsequent offenses, offenders are deported over the border via a wood chipper chute.
Enact that and watch how quickly border crossings decrease and self-deportations increase.
Dawg you’re a liberal. IBTZ.
Oh Lordy are you that out of touch?
A recusal would be an admission he could not fairly judge the case. What judge is going to admit that? But that's why there is an appellate system.
Aren’t you afraid you’re missing something over on that Lincoln thread?
It is an admission that he has conflicts of interest that would give the appearance of impropriety.
Deport this la raza judge, too.
judge should recuse himself...
Thanks (comment #1) , that is the most detailed description I have read here, the other posts didn’t add up.
Where did you get/here this from?
What about the claim that his DACA status had expired due to time?
I find it hard to debate libs on stuff like this unless I have a story that adds up.
I recall that President Trump canceled the EO for DAPA but has not yet for DACA, preferring to review DACA persons on a case-by-case basis.
That’s very generous of President Trump.
DAPA is for illegal parents of ‘children’ born in the US or allegedly brought in as minors.
DACA is for illegal ‘children’ who were allegedly brought in as minors, ‘Dreamers’.
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) is an Obama immigration policy by Executive Order made in June 2012 so conveniently during the election campaign. DACA persons or ‘Dreamers’ say they entered the country as minors. Maybe they did, maybe they did not. They only need state they did to receive a renewable two-year period of deferred action from deportation and eligibility for a work permit.
This so-called ‘Dreamer’ that the President has ordered removed is thus under a two-year ‘renewable’ deferred action policy that is executive branch policy and is not a law of the United States, a policy executed by the White House having nothing to do with the judicial branch of the United States.
The Trump Administration is able to move to strike this illegal’s complaint. There are no grounds for habeas corpus because the President has absolute constitutional authority over matters of movement of non-citizens and non-residents inside the United States and its territories. The courts have no jurisdiction.
Where did you get/here this from?
It was discussed on WMAL's Mornings On The Mall radio show at the 6:00 hour. The podcast should be available tomorrow (21 April). Mary Walter, the co-host, gave the details.
I foresee grounds for impeaching the judge.
another difference with immigrants...
a green card holder doesn’t sneak in and out of our country...
he or she can walk, drive, fly, bus, etc through a border check point using a passport and the green card...
as long as they don’t stay gone for more than 365 days theyre good...
I went to Europe for 4 months when I was a green card holder...
coming back you do have to go in the line for non-citizens for customs, but you already have permission to enter as an immigrant...
there’s so much more to this story since he repeatedly entered illegally AFTER getting DACA...
well for 1. His DACA had expired and he couldn’t get it renewed...
that is a big glaring reason to deport him...he was only allowed to stay and not be deported while he was DACA...hes not that at present...
be interesting to see what this judge does...
The case goes in front of Gonzalo “El Caudillo de Mexico” Curiel?
Forget it. Might as well be in front of the Mexican Supreme Court. He’ll pat him on the head and say, “Pobrecito”, and issue a scathing order against the government for having the temerity to enforce any law against him.
DACA is not law. It is something dreamed up by Obama to protect illegal aliens from our laws in direct violation of the oath of office to faithfully execute the laws.
It must be ended.
It is still an illegal program.
According to the law, DREAMers are supposed to notify the authorities before doing that to get authorization.
**************************************
DACA is not a law.
DACA is an illegal executive order that should have already been rescinded.
The GOP refused to sue to stop Obama.
DAPA was halted by a judge, the states sued to stop it.
No one sued to stop DACA because the GOP are spineless co-conspirators.
Executive orders have the full force of law, based on the authority derived from statute or the Constitution itself. The ability to make such orders is also based on express or implied Acts of Congress that delegate to the President some degree of discretionary power (delegated legislation).Source: Executive Order (United States)
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.