U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen delivered a major blow to President Barack Obama’s unilateral executive action on immigration with a preliminary injunction in Brownsville, Texas. The case involves a challenge by 26 states and, to succeed, the states had to meet a high standard that they were likely to prevail on the merits in the case. Hanen found that, absent an order, the states will “suffer irreparable harm in this case.” The ruling sets up an appeal that could move the case more rapidly through the system in yet another challenge to the President’s unilateral actions. [For the purposes of full disclosure, I have previously testified against the President’s unilateral actions and I am currently serving as lead counsel to the House of Representatives in its challenge to such actions taken with regard to the Affordable Care Act.]
The case enjoins some provisions scheduled to take effect this week. For example, Obama ordered the expansion of a program that to protect young immigrants from deportation if they were brought to the U.S. illegally as children. The case also deals with an order extending deportation protections to parents of U.S. citizens and permanent residents who have been in the country for some years.
Judge Hanen wrote that “The court finds that the government’s failure to secure the border has exacerbated illegal immigration into this country. . . Further, the record supports the finding that this lack of enforcement, combined with the country’s high rate of illegal immigration, significantly drains the states’ resources.”
Hanen has previously expressed frustration with the lack of border and immigration enforcement. In December 2013, he handled an immigration smuggling case where he expressed dismay over the Administration essentially facilitating conspiracies to violate federal law by reunited families and not deporting violators. In one case involving the sentencing of a smuggler, Hanen lashed out at the federal government and noted that “[i]nstead of arresting (the child’s mother) for instigating the conspiracy to violate our border security laws, the (Homeland Security Department) delivered the child to her — thus successfully completing the mission of the criminal conspiracy.” Hanen added “DHS has simply chosen not to enforce the United States’ border security laws.”
The Justice Department always has the advantage in such appeals given past cases deferring to the Executive Branch on immigration, though the opinion below raises some significant concerns.
The case will now likely go to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans (where I clerked after law school).
Here is the lengthy opinion: Immigration Opinion
Source: NY Times
Atty. Turley,
I’m sending you this link on America 2050 which contains some harsh realities about the entire program and overreach by members of our government that have, in fact, sold out to the globalists after pilfering every penny they could. The people will fight, is what I’m hearing back slowly but I expect more reactions to this. Would love to hear your perspectives on it.
http://www.america2050tokill250americans.info
This, all of us feel, is treasonous of lawmakers, the president and whoever else has sold out country out, including previous administrations as this has been culminating for a long, long time.
Love you articles, keep em’ coming, your perspectives are always spot-on.
Regards, George Mandell
There’s no assimilation in transformation through dark mass invasion. Wake Up!
“Faux News” is sooo played and lame. It was cute, about 4 years ago! Now, it’s just stale as year old bread.
Isaac, I don’t understand your question. Please elaborate.
So, Obama is suspending accepting any new applications. Sounds like a President doing his job, respecting the rule of law etc. Or does he have some other nefarious Chicago plot to sneak in under the door?
Well, Nick, does he?
According to U.S. and International Law;
All the U.S. Invasions are Wars of Aggression = War Crimes
Washington, DC = Nazi Berlin
And I have ilk?!? Awesome. I’ve always wanted ilk
Minions are better. Aspire to have minions. 🙂
DBQ – I think you have to take care of your minions. You are responsible for them. I do not think you are responsible for your ilk.
Whatevs, randy. That’s your OPINION–not a FACT–of what the reporter did. Here’s mine: the reporter wrote in essence, “hey guys one judge in Texas said this action’s illegal, but I agree with the White House’s appeal to authority that we can ignore that claim and I won’t closely examine any objections to that explanation”. Lazy.
But now I’m “extreme”? Haha. Jump to conclusions much? Once again, Nick is proven right. Dang, I probably owe him a beer after your predicted rant.
And I have ilk?!? Awesome. I’ve always wanted ilk.
calypso, All the reporter did was to print the WH response to its loss. I didn’t see any “I agree with the WH” unless you think that getting the losing sides opinion is bias. I guess that when the WH loses a significant case, we should NOT allow any response from them to appear in any media at all. That is the FAUX news method, not any journalistic or free press method.
Living in an agricultural portion of the State, we have many Hispanics who live and work here. The ones who are legal and went through many hoops and spent a LOT of money to go through the legal immigration process are…..to say the least…..really p*ssed off at the amnesty bullhocky.
They worked and went through much to get legal citizenship and NOW it is being handed out like candy from a broken pinata. They are NOT happy campers.
The ones who are still illegal are going to be subject to being fired or lose their jobs because the business owners can no longer say they didn’t know that they were illegal. Their illegal status is going to be official and the owners can be subject to all sorts of fines and even jail.
That is assuming that the Federal Government doesn’t decide to ignore its own laws…..again. Just like the ignoring of the laws of Obamacare, we will see selective enforcement. Favored groups and people who have the money to pay lobbyists will get off…..out of favor political opponents, be prepared to become the selective target.
Is it any wonder that people hold the government in contempt? WHY should we obey any laws at anytime or anywhere when our own government is lawless?.
Randy – AP is biased because it only reports experts on one side of this issue.
For example, Professor Turley here on this blog has challenged the legality of some of Obama’s actions, and yet the AP could quote that legal experts at the WH justified it. If they fail to point out experts who detract, like Professor Turley, they are biased and unbalanced, and fail to do the basic journalism of presenting the facts of the issue.
Karen, The judge issued his opinion making Texas and others winners and the article reported his position in his ruling. It is simple journalism to ask the losing side for their take on it. Unless you think that as the parties exit the courtroom, the reporter should say to the losing side, I cannot interview you since you lost and are a loser and if I do people will think I am biased in your favor. We only report the winning side. Hell even in sports they go to the losers locker room for their comments. I guess that doing so in courtrooms is beyond the pale.
It would be bias if what the WH said was an outright lie and that NO other judges had agreed with them. The judge validated Turley’s position so I think that using him when he was not there would be superfluous. Think that it would be bias if the winning side lawyers said we are going to go out and get drunk to celebrate and they did not report that? Let’s get real. This is a straight news story not an in depth essay on the subject.
It’s like CA has a split personality – on the one hand we have all these immigration laws, including those penalizing those who hire them. And on the other, we have policies expressly forbidding implementing those laws, such as when the LAPD is not allowed to report to ICE.
We need to decide if we’re a country, or a region, and stick to it.
DBQ – great post.
Here’s another border state phenomenon that affects businesses. Illegal aliens choose a street corner to try to get day jobs. It was common in the town we used to live in. They would form crowds. People stopped going to local businesses because they didn’t want to explain 100 times that they were there to shop, not hire. For instance, when I pulled up to a local store, in my pickup truck, all of a sudden the doors got jerked open and strangers started quarreling over who would hop inside my truck . . . next to my baby in his car seat. I invented new and creative curses in Spanish and they scattered before Mama Grizzly. They just wanted a job, but it was extremely off-putting to have strangers just climb into your car and into the truck bed, and I never shopped there again. When the business owners complained, the police were not allowed to move them along because that would be “racist” and they were prevented from reporting anyone to ICE. This was fully supported by the city council, who didn’t want to appear “racist”. All they did was set certain hours (daytime not nighttime). The last I heard, the businesses at the latest chosen corner were suffering. I don’t know if it was ever resolved.
I’m curious how often they prosecute companies for hiring illegal aliens. It’s hard to compete in the construction industry, because every job site it seems has illegal aliens. Those who follow the laws, are licensed, bonded, and insured cannot compete with the illegal alien crews, and homeowners go by price alone. When I look around here in CA, I see that law not being enforced at all.
Karen S – the owner and several managers of Danny’s Car Washes here in the Valley of the Sun is going to prison for at least a couple of years for hiring illegals. They were firing them after raids then changing their paper work and rehiring them. Arizona does require employers to use eVerify.
“hinkydinkkenna
Whether there is enough flexibility in prosecutorial discretion to support all of the Obama executive actions is yet to be seen. But that is not the point of this exercise. This is all about 2016 and a trap being set for the Republicans who cannot resist the pull of their nativist core to oppose letting “those” people into the country.”
Just… no. Feel free to think this is about politics. It isn’t. While the threat of the this country becoming a military dictatorship is slim, the possibility that the executive will have unchecked authority to act without legislative approval is very very real. This isn’t a democrat or republican issue. It’s an issue for anyone that believes in three branches, each with their own role to play in running our country.
Put another way, would you want Bush with the powers Obama is trying to centralize? Would you be supportive if it were Bush or Rand Paul or Hillary Clinton or Elizabeth Warren with unchecked and unlimited authority to remake the country into their version of equal and free?
Sadly, Our host JT is in it for noble and legal reasons, but gets pilloried here and elsewhere, w/ his integrity questioned by people who used to be weekend bloggers. Some folks would not know integrity if it walked up and slapped them upside their head. Some are so self delusional they think they are the reason this blog is so successful. It is hilarious to read. Great The Onion material.
randyjet:
“While I support Obama on most things, this is one area in which it is obvious to me that it is a serious overreach on his part. As Bailers pointed out it is one thing to not go after illegals under prosecutorial discretion, but wildly illegal to grant legal status unilaterally and give SS numbers in violation of the law.”
Thank you. It takes character to criticize someone you voted for, or your own party. I’m not being facetious, but entirely honest. On the flip side of this phenomenon, I personally would struggle to praise Monsanto even if the CEO saved a kitten.
My greatest concerns are that a blanket amnesty would allow criminals to remain here. Yes, they are supposed to go through background checks, but over 90% never show up for their court date. We have news stories continually of criminals who were arrested, found to be illegal aliens, get out, and then since they weren’t deported they commit more heinous crimes. It’s in the papers here ALL THE TIME. There is a real price we pay for not following our own immigration laws. The Sheriff’s Department here is prohibited from turning anyone over to ICE.
My second concern is that this always acts as an attractant, and merely compounds the problem. The Dream Act directly led to this surge of 65,000 unaccompanied kids (in addition to the dead and kidnapped kids along the way), which will then allow their parents to come over. Another Amnesty will precede another wave.
We have a right to set immigration numbers to levels the country can absorb without taxing its benefits system or employment market. When unemployment rises, I expect the responsible thing to do is for immigration to lower. And yet, Obama cares about our poor SO MUCH that he keeps causing surges in immigration when people are already competing more for entry level jobs.
Karen S I think that we would agree on immigration reform as could both parties if they had the interest of the USA at heart. Unfortunately the drivers on both sides are of such extremes that it is impossible at this point. One only has to look at the nuts who are for the judge and against any foreigner being here and cannot accept Obama as being even a US citizen.
I too live on the border for much time and I get to listen to the gun battles going on across it in Nuevo Laredo. The problem with allowing any amnesty is the lack of security on the border and no physical barrier to slow down illegals. Then it would be that I could support an amnesty IF certain conditions were met. One would be that ONLY a passport is acceptable ID. That any felony conviction will result in immediate deportation and must us the Secure Comm fingerprint data base, so that any person who has been caught crossing illegally before and applies, will be arrested and deported ASAP. That E-Verify is mandatory for ALL employers. That Social Security no match letters MUST be respected and answered within the time frame, otherwise, ICE will be notified and the person arrested. That random workplace raids will be stepped up and increased and deportations become immediate. That will help kill off the illegal underground job market. That the native countries will have to conduct a criminal background check before the illegal gets an amnesty. Such measures will ensure that only the hard working, mostly law abiding illegals get to stay. Then Congress will have to make funds available to charter all the planes needed to ship the illegals back home, and to hire an army of clerks to process the millions of illegals who will try and game and defraud the system.
The worst case of a person gaming the system is the woman who had a son born in the US and who then sought sanctuary is a store front “church” to avoid being deported. She recently returned to the US claiming asylum for persecution back in Mexico. Though she and her son addressed the Mexican Congress about their unfair treatment by the USA. She pled guilty to THREE Felonies and rather than going to prison for them, she agreed to be deported. Then she refused to leave! Seems that no good deed goes unpunished. Now she has crossed the border legally with her son in tow. She was admitted back into the US, given a hearing date, and permission to live and work in the US before she gets her hearing. Maybe two or three years down the road. She may or may not show up, and there is no way they can find her if she runs again. So guess what will happen?
Sadly, the support or opposition to this legal challenge will mostly be voiced along partisan idealism rather than the legal merits of the case.
It was shocking to me when the federal government threatened Arizona if it UPHELD our immigration law. There is this trend towards utter lawlessness in the White House that is very disturbing.
Why does this Administration refuse to obey and enforce our laws? Why do otherwise reasonable people feel it is somehow rude or unfair to require those who live in neighboring countries to obey our immigration laws? People immigrate or obtain work visas, legally, every day, from all around the world. But, inexplicably, it’s unfair if you live in Mexico to have to go through the system, have a background check, and be screened for diseases such as antibiotic resistant TB.
This shouldn’t be divisive. We can improve our ponderous immigration system. But allowing an open border, and people to stream in at unsustainable numbers, when black unemployment is around 26%, makes no sense, no matter how you look at it. You are either a country with an enforced border, or you are a “region.”
Opposing illegal immigration does not mean you oppose legal immigration. That’s a false hare.
I live in a border state, and we have many problems directly due to illegal immigration, including crime from the Mexican drug cartels. Fix the system, don’t abandon the law.
Brian Williams was obviously too busy delivering Eisenhower’s farewell speech where he warned about the government-news media complex.
Whether there is enough flexibility in prosecutorial discretion to support all of the Obama executive actions is yet to be seen. But that is not the point of this exercise. This is all about 2016 and a trap being set for the Republicans who cannot resist the pull of their nativist core to oppose letting “those” people into the country. Whatever happens in the legal proceedings, the Democrats will energize the portions of the electorate that support the new immigrants. This includes more than Hispanic voters, but also includes families of Asians and East Europeans who have come to the US and are “illegal.”
The immigrant policy opponents are overwhelming other traditional Republican supporters such as businesses, large and small, that benefit from folks who have a good work ethic and can be paid less.
So true Republicans should be wary of what side they really want to support. If not, they will be relegated to the class of truthers and birthers who will be bound up with those complaining about Benghazi and the IRS red herrings.
Brian Williams (Bri Bri)now claims that he was there in Kenya when Obama was born.
But wait. Obama said that he would follow the Congressional laws enacted on emigration and that his Executive orders were to go forward while Congress was stuck in the mud. Congress is off for a ten day vacation by the way. So much for all the comments calling our President Obumbo.
Congress is going to let Homeland Security funding lapse. Call them Congressmen With Out Papers. C-WOPS.