Editor's notes: It is all so very political . . . . even our courts. So, "we" won the first round. What does that mean. Unless the States are ready and willing to stand up and against Central Planning and its lawlessness, our nation as a free, representative "democracy" will end up being no different from the elected democracies of Venezuela, or Russia, or China, or Iran. I mean, they all have elections and, none of their citizenry are allowed to own guns, except, maybe, in Iran.
Out of the Washington Times: Led by Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, the 20 states challenging the new policy filed their case in Brownsville. It could have gone to one of two judges — the other a Clinton appointee — but it landed in the lap of Judge Hanen last week, putting Mr. Obama on the defensive early.
“It’s the Constitution itself that is under assault by the president of the United States by this executive order,” Mr. Abbott told NBC’s “Meet the Press” this weekend. “This lawsuit is not about immigration. The issue in this lawsuit is abuse of executive power.”
Analysts on both sides of the issue said Mr. Obama’s opponents were fortunate to draw Judge Hanen, who has already shown a deep distrust of Homeland Security officials, questioning both their policies and their legal arguments.
In a 10-page order last December, just as the surge of illegal immigrant children was beginning, he blasted the Obama administration for refusing to get tough on enforcement and instead shipping children caught at the border to live with their illegal immigrant parents here in the U.S. — and refusing to even try to deport those parents.
The DHS should cease telling the citizens of the United States that it is enforcing our border security laws because it is clearly not,” Judge Hanen wrote. “Even worse, it is helping those who violate these laws.”Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/7/obama-amnesty-in-jeopardy-with-bush-judicial-appoi/#ixzz3LHZTsiT0
No comments:
Post a Comment