Skip to comments.Judge halts full DACA restart
Posted on 08/18/2018 11:52:46 AM PDT by jazusamo
The federal judge who had ordered the government to restart the Obama-era DACA deportation amnesty in full backed off his decision Friday and said the government does not, after all, have to begin accepting brand new applications.
Judge John D. Bates acknowledged the legal mess thats arisen around DACA and said he didnt want to make it worse, so he issued a partial stay of his own ruling.
That means that while illegal immigrant Dreamers who already have had DACA protections can apply for renewals, no brand new applicants can apply to start the process.
Judge Bates also delayed part of his previous ruling that would have allowed those with DACA to apply for special protections known as advance parole permission to travel outside the U.S. and then return which can, in some cases, turn into a pathway to citizenship.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
He knows he is going to have his head handed to him on appeal.
And the SCOTUS has already rules on idiot Federal judges making up their own immigration laws.
Agreed...I believe he caught flak from some of his fellow judges.
Thought it impossible for liberals to see the consequences of their ideas
How do you renew something that does not exist
kill the whole program. illegal.
This sounds like the judge knows he will be overturned but he just wants to delay PDJTs order. Too bad there isnt a way for judges whose decisions are overturned at greater than a certain percentage to be considered unfit and removed from the bench. No NFL or NBA referee, for example, who was too frequently overturned by instant replay would keep his job.
. How often were Obamas executive orders stayed by judges? Ever?
Support Free Republic, Folks!
Please reign in the asshole gods that you have inflicted upon us.
Better idea. He should throw himself off a bridge into the path of a freight train.
Few or none
Of note also, how many judges' orders did Obama obey? None. Gulf drilling after the spill comes to mind.
too bad the ‘you broke it, you own rule’ does not apply to judges.
Agreed...It’d sure cut down on the whack job activist judge decisions.
Judges need the same liability that applies to the rest of us.
Basically he backs off because he knows the Supremes would throw away all this bull sht and would see what this leftist plot is all about
Your tax money at work
This “judge” sounds like a pathetically confused LIB nitwit. Has he been psychologically evaluated of late???
There certainly IS a mechanism for these judges to be removed from the bench, and it should be being used frequently these days. It is called impeachment and conviction, and the US Congess is utterly derelict in its duty in not doing so. The time has come for we, the people, to stop indulging in wishful thinking that something is being done (I am speaking to you Q and Mark Taylor people specifically by the way, and the rest of us in general) and all of us start demanding with one voice that something be done right now, something that is obvious and visible to every single leftist activist judge in this country.
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.