Did it come as any surprise to anyone why the 26 states coalition and their supporters would choose the Brownsville federal district court to file their motion to temporarily block President Barack Obama's executive action on immigration and give the states time to pursue a lawsuit aiming to permanently stop the orders?
It was Hanen – who's been on the federal court since 2002 after being nominated by President George W. Bush – who suggested in a 2013 case that Homeland Security should be arresting parents living in the U.S. illegally who induce their children to cross the border.
Hanen went further than that.
In the 2013 case, he compared the cases to the government seizing weapons being smuggled across the border and delivering them to the criminals inside the United States who ordered them.
He expressed frustration in the December 2013 order in an immigrant-smuggling case that he'd had four situations in a month in which children who arrived in the U.S. illegally alone were reunited with parents who were themselves in the country illegally.
(To read excerpts of the 2013 decision, click on this link: http://politicalvelcraft.org/2013/12/26/u-s-federal-judge-judge-hanen-obama-assisted-in-criminal-conspiracy-to-smuggle-illegal-alien-children-into-the-u-s/)
"Instead 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 wrote.
The judge compared the cases to the government seizing weapons being smuggled across the border and delivering them to the criminals inside the United States who ordered them.
"DHS has simply chosen not to enforce the United States' border security laws," Hanen wrote. He said the government's failures to enforce immigration laws were "both dangerous and unconscionable," although he separately noted, "This court takes no position on the topic of immigration reform, nor should one read this opinion as a commentary on that issue."
"Instead 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 wrote.
The judge compared the cases to the government seizing weapons being smuggled across the border and delivering them to the criminals inside the United States who ordered them.
"DHS has simply chosen not to enforce the United States' border security laws," Hanen wrote. He said the government's failures to enforce immigration laws were "both dangerous and unconscionable," although he separately noted, "This court takes no position on the topic of immigration reform, nor should one read this opinion as a commentary on that issue."
His decision on Monday puts on hold Obama's orders that could spare from deportation as many as five million people who are in the U.S. illegally.
The Associated Press reported that Hanen wrote in a memorandum accompanying his order that the lawsuit should go forward. Without a preliminary injunction, he said, the states would "suffer irreparable harm in this case."
"The genie would be impossible to put back into the bottle," he wrote, adding that he agreed that legalizing the presence of millions of people is a "virtually irreversible" action.
The U.S. Department of Justice will appeal the ruling, the White House said. The appeal will be heard by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.
The coalition of states, led by Texas and made up of mostly conservative states in the South and Midwest, argues that Obama has violated the "Take Care Clause" of the U.S. Constitution, which they say limits the scope of presidential power, and that his executive actions would be difficult to undo once immigrants started to apply for deferred action. They also say Obama's order would force increased investment in law enforcement, health care and education
Among those supporting Obama's executive order is a group of 12 mostly liberal states, including Washington and California, as well as the District of Columbia. They filed a motion with Hanen in support of Obama, arguing the directives will substantially benefit states and will further the public interest.
A group of law enforcement officials, including the Major Cities Chiefs Association and more than 20 police chiefs and sheriffs from across the country, also filed a motion in support, arguing the executive action will improve public safety by encouraging cooperation between police and individuals with concerns about their immigration status.
"The genie would be impossible to put back into the bottle," he wrote, adding that he agreed that legalizing the presence of millions of people is a "virtually irreversible" action.
The U.S. Department of Justice will appeal the ruling, the White House said. The appeal will be heard by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.
The coalition of states, led by Texas and made up of mostly conservative states in the South and Midwest, argues that Obama has violated the "Take Care Clause" of the U.S. Constitution, which they say limits the scope of presidential power, and that his executive actions would be difficult to undo once immigrants started to apply for deferred action. They also say Obama's order would force increased investment in law enforcement, health care and education
Among those supporting Obama's executive order is a group of 12 mostly liberal states, including Washington and California, as well as the District of Columbia. They filed a motion with Hanen in support of Obama, arguing the directives will substantially benefit states and will further the public interest.
A group of law enforcement officials, including the Major Cities Chiefs Association and more than 20 police chiefs and sheriffs from across the country, also filed a motion in support, arguing the executive action will improve public safety by encouraging cooperation between police and individuals with concerns about their immigration status.
13 comments:
This is no surprise coming from a Republican judge. His analogies are moronic.
11:24, you are the moron. Judge Hanen is a very competent and thoughtful jurist. And what's all this "anti-Obama" headline stuff. Why not call Obama's executive actions what they are--unconstitutional.
Andrew Hanen is a very competent Judge whose decisions are not swayed by politics. He will fairly and evenly apply the law to all cases before him.
In this case, immigration illegal or otherwise was not the core issue. The core issues was the power of the President to issue such a broad sweeping Executive Order. This is a fundamental issue about the separation of powers in our Constitutional government. To implement the decision until the Constitutionality of it is fully decided is to force the various states to spend billions of taxpayer dollars on what very well may be an illegal act.
Again, this is not about politics, immigration, racism or anything else other than the rule of law.
Come in the front door like a friend, not an open window like a thief.
Slavery was once "constitutional " .
I support LEGAL IMMIGRATION not ILLEGAL UNLAWFUL ENTRY TO OUR COUNTRY.
I COMEND JUDGE HANEN FINALLY A MAN WITH REAL BALLS!!!!!!!!!!!!
Anon of February 17, 2015 at 6:24 PM
"Slavery was once "constitutional " ...And yet this country reverse it's wrong. It took none other a REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT-LINCOLN who the DUMBOKRAT fought against NOT TO END SLAVERY!!!!
You just proof yourself just another DUMB ASS LOW INFORMATION DUMBOKRAT.
It is all about ideology and racism .
Competent . ..yes he is; apply the law fairly in all cases before him? Hardly .Trey Martinez would be in jail if he was a fair and ethical judge.
Lincoln was a Democrat and didn't know it .
The "pioneers" who entered Texas crossing the Sabinas River were illegals .
It's about the law. The law, at least until Obama changed it with the stroke of a pen, says that people who sneak into the country illegally are....illegals. Want to change it, change the law, don't exceed Executive Authority and try to pencil whip it.
DemocRATs love to tout the rights of queer folk to marry, women to kill babies up to the time of birth, and for everyone to vote. All great and wonderful things, unless you happen to be that baby that is having your brains sucked out prior to delivery, or until your election results are changed by folks (alive and dead)voting multiple times, or because queer folk want the rules changed, we have people demanding to marry sheep or goats.
You can rest assured that if these illegals were Republican voters, DemocRATs would be demanding they be rounded up and returned to their home countries.
La cara del jeez la tiene de pure carbon.
Post a Comment