US files appeal of judge's hold on immigration action

[webfact]

US files appeal of judge's hold on immigration action

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department urged a federal appeals court Monday to reverse a hold a judge placed on President Barack Obama's immigration executive action.

The 69-page brief was filed with the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ahead of arguments scheduled for next month.

Lawyers for the federal government are challenging a preliminary injunction issued in February by a federal judge in Brownsville, Texas. That decision placed on hold an executive action that could spare from deportation as many as 5 million people who are in the U.S. illegally.

Justice Department lawyers say in the new court filing that the federal government has unique authority to enforce the nation's immigration laws and to use its limited resources to exercise discretion during the deportation process, including by deferring removal of certain groups of immigrants, such as those who do not pose a public safety threat.

The executive action was challenged by a coalition of 26 states, led by Texas, who argued that the move was unconstitutional. The states have said they will suffer irreversible economic harm if the injunction is lifted. But the Justice Department says the states have failed to show exactly how they would be negatively affected by the executive action.

A court hearing has been set for April 17.

The other states seeking to block Obama's orders are Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia and Wisconsin.


-- (c) Associated Press 2015-03-31

[Publicus]

The Supreme Court last month unanimously reversed a federal appeals court ruling that was the same as this one, i.e., that cited the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946. In short, the APA does not apply when "interpretative" rules of policy are made, which is what the DHS is doing at the president's direction.

This controversial judge has tried to write new law in this case that will not survive the SCOTUS and thus should not survive the federal appeals court either that is hearing the procedures and processes of this case.

The US 5th Circuit Court of Appeals cited in the OP needs to grant the government's petition, and to thereby restrict the lower district court judge's latitude in the case.

The judge had already claimed in a 2013 immigration case that Prez Obama was giving an "open invitation" to "the most dangerous criminals" to enter the US. Sounds actually that the judge down there in Texas has some ideological and political brethren in places where many others of us meet.

U.S. Judge Andrew Hanen has history of opposing Obama immigration policies

In December 2013 Hanen wrote, “This court is quite concerned with the apparent policy of the Department of Homeland Security of completing the criminal mission of individuals who are violating the border security of the United States.”

Hanen called the administration's deportation policy “misguided,” writing that it “endangers America” and is “an open invitation to the most dangerous criminals in society,” including Mexican drug cartel bosses.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-immigration-lawsuit-hanen-20150217-story.html

[Linky]

I thought the court was to ensure the law, as intended by legislators was followed. Not to interpret the law in an ad hoc way.

[Daniel Ingalls]

........I just don't get it! Why on earth would we want to finance the support of 5 million Mexicans into this country? We all know the reason is the Demo vote. And most states only require the paid water or electric bill as proof of residency. What about citizenship? I thought it was a law you must be a US citizen in order to vote. And what about proof of citizenship?

It wasn't long ago in North Carolina, I had to register to vote, and brought in my birth certificate as proof of citizenship along with a Drivers License. Social Security Card is not a legal I.D. Although it would be a good idea to have your picture on it in the future, with the labeling US Citizen or Alien.

I believe in a national ID card. Which clearly states US citizen, and must be presented to vote. Drivers license should not be used to verify Citizenship. I also believe we should have a National American Drivers License. Each of the 50 States will conduct testing and regulations, and issued licenses. With one data base. This will prevent someone with a DWI, or DUI from get a license from a different State. There are simple solutions to simple problems, and only when Lawyers get involved do we have problems.

We have all heard this time and time again. illegal entry into this country is a criminal offense. It is the responsibility of border patrol to round them up and send them back across the border into Mexico. I don't care if they are European, Asian, or Mexican. If they were picked up at the nearest border, return them back. Let the Mexican government deal with it.

Some say, they are just poor workers looking for a harvest to pick. I say, lets invest in Mexican farmers across the border and help them establish good farms with good crops. Let the poor Mexican pick the crops in Mexico.

When my wife became a naturalized citizen of the United States, she was required to speak English, take a written test on the Constitution of the United States, and understand the branches of government. Coming from Asia, she had to take a TB test, and bring along a chest X-ray. for Immigrations. She had a green card for two years before granted citizenship. I was in the Military at that time, so the waiting list was shorten.

There are thousands of people around the world, waiting for a chance at immigrating to the US. All are in line waiting. To allow these 5 million to walk in this country, bumping the long line is an injustice to those who respect and obey the law.

I strongly feel we should remove the statue of liberty, or turn it around facing the world. With the inscription stating, "Turn around and go where you came from! We are full. Return to your own country and change the government to fit your needs of freedom. We can no longer afford the costs to support you and your family."

[ALLSEEINGEYE]

I thought the court was to ensure the law, as intended by legislators was followed. Not to interpret the law in an ad hoc way.

I agree but you did see that this guy was from? Texas!! I am sure he would also pass a law stating the world is 6,000 years old and man walked with Dinosaurs!! It is a bizzarro world we live in my friend.

[nuananddon]

It's not only the Mexicans any more, all of Latin America, Asians(Chinese,Koreans,Thais,etc etc) all got the idea that everything there is free,medical,food stamps,education,housing,etc etc. Just a small sampling from our Amphur there are numberous Thais that went there years ago on tourist visas and have been working ever since, for cash, no taxes, no social security deductions, no other taxes paid out either, but sending money back home and bragging how rich they are. When they do finally want to return they just buy a plane ticket and return, try that here on an overstay and see if they just let you go home Scott free, no way they fine the hell out of you and that is the law the way my dumbass government should do it.

[Srikcir]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

I thought the court was to ensure the law, as intended by legislators was followed. Not to interpret the law in an ad hoc way.

A court JUDGES by interpretating the law.

[Srikcir]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

........I just don't get it! Why on earth would we want to finance the support of 5 million Mexicans into this country? We all know the reason is the Demo vote. And most states only require the paid water or electric bill as proof of residency. What about citizenship? I thought it was a law you must be a US citizen in order to vote. And what about proof of citizenship?

It wasn't long ago in North Carolina, I had to register to vote, and brought in my birth certificate as proof of citizenship along with a Drivers License. Social Security Card is not a legal I.D. Although it would be a good idea to have your picture on it in the future, with the labeling US Citizen or Alien.

I believe in a national ID card. Which clearly states US citizen, and must be presented to vote. Drivers license should not be used to verify Citizenship. I also believe we should have a National American Drivers License. Each of the 50 States will conduct testing and regulations, and issued licenses. With one data base. This will prevent someone with a DWI, or DUI from get a license from a different State. There are simple solutions to simple problems, and only when Lawyers get involved do we have problems.

We have all heard this time and time again. illegal entry into this country is a criminal offense. It is the responsibility of border patrol to round them up and send them back across the border into Mexico. I don't care if they are European, Asian, or Mexican. If they were picked up at the nearest border, return them back. Let the Mexican government deal with it.

Some say, they are just poor workers looking for a harvest to pick. I say, lets invest in Mexican farmers across the border and help them establish good farms with good crops. Let the poor Mexican pick the crops in Mexico.

When my wife became a naturalized citizen of the United States, she was required to speak English, take a written test on the Constitution of the United States, and understand the branches of government. Coming from Asia, she had to take a TB test, and bring along a chest X-ray. for Immigrations. She had a green card for two years before granted citizenship. I was in the Military at that time, so the waiting list was shorten.

There are thousands of people around the world, waiting for a chance at immigrating to the US. All are in line waiting. To allow these 5 million to walk in this country, bumping the long line is an injustice to those who respect and obey the law.

I strongly feel we should remove the statue of liberty, or turn it around facing the world. With the inscription stating, "Turn around and go where you came from! We are full. Return to your own country and change the government to fit your needs of freedom. We can no longer afford the costs to support you and your family."

Yet you live in another country as an expat? You have an odd sense of patriotism.

[snarky66]

I thought the court was to ensure the law, as intended by legislators was followed. Not to interpret the law in an ad hoc way.

Liberals don't like judges legislating from the bench.

Unless the topic is gay marriage or Obama care. In that case they're fine with it.

What we have here is Obama choosing to enforce some laws and choosing to not enforce other laws, in violation of his oath of office. So any judge who tries to rein him in is good with me.

[cookee68]

It's not only the Mexicans any more, all of Latin America, Asians(Chinese,Koreans,Thais,etc etc) all got the idea that everything there is free,medical,food stamps,education,housing,etc etc. Just a small sampling from our Amphur there are numberous Thais that went there years ago on tourist visas and have been working ever since, for cash, no taxes, no social security deductions, no other taxes paid out either, but sending money back home and bragging how rich they are. When they do finally want to return they just buy a plane ticket and return, try that here on an overstay and see if they just let you go home Scott free, no way they fine the hell out of you and that is the law the way my dumbass government should do it.

so very true, I feel more a foreigner in my own country now.

[cookee68]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

........I just don't get it! Why on earth would we want to finance the support of 5 million Mexicans into this country? We all know the reason is the Demo vote. And most states only require the paid water or electric bill as proof of residency. What about citizenship? I thought it was a law you must be a US citizen in order to vote. And what about proof of citizenship?

It wasn't long ago in North Carolina, I had to register to vote, and brought in my birth certificate as proof of citizenship along with a Drivers License. Social Security Card is not a legal I.D. Although it would be a good idea to have your picture on it in the future, with the labeling US Citizen or Alien.

I believe in a national ID card. Which clearly states US citizen, and must be presented to vote. Drivers license should not be used to verify Citizenship. I also believe we should have a National American Drivers License. Each of the 50 States will conduct testing and regulations, and issued licenses. With one data base. This will prevent someone with a DWI, or DUI from get a license from a different State. There are simple solutions to simple problems, and only when Lawyers get involved do we have problems.

We have all heard this time and time again. illegal entry into this country is a criminal offense. It is the responsibility of border patrol to round them up and send them back across the border into Mexico. I don't care if they are European, Asian, or Mexican. If they were picked up at the nearest border, return them back. Let the Mexican government deal with it.

Some say, they are just poor workers looking for a harvest to pick. I say, lets invest in Mexican farmers across the border and help them establish good farms with good crops. Let the poor Mexican pick the crops in Mexico.

When my wife became a naturalized citizen of the United States, she was required to speak English, take a written test on the Constitution of the United States, and understand the branches of government. Coming from Asia, she had to take a TB test, and bring along a chest X-ray. for Immigrations. She had a green card for two years before granted citizenship. I was in the Military at that time, so the waiting list was shorten.

There are thousands of people around the world, waiting for a chance at immigrating to the US. All are in line waiting. To allow these 5 million to walk in this country, bumping the long line is an injustice to those who respect and obey the law.

I strongly feel we should remove the statue of liberty, or turn it around facing the world. With the inscription stating, "Turn around and go where you came from! We are full. Return to your own country and change the government to fit your needs of freedom. We can no longer afford the costs to support you and your family."

Yet you live in another country as an expat? You have an odd sense of patriotism.

yes but he is not asking for citizenship, there are no hand outs, and he is not benefiting from or off that country, and he abides by rules, most come for the hand outs, even Africans who are still in Africa, know all about the countries to come too, for the free hand outs

[Publicus]

I thought the court was to ensure the law, as intended by legislators was followed. Not to interpret the law in an ad hoc way.

Liberals don't like judges legislating from the bench.

Unless the topic is gay marriage or Obama care. In that case they're fine with it.

What we have here is Obama choosing to enforce some laws and choosing to not enforce other laws, in violation of his oath of office. So any judge who tries to rein him in is good with me.

This tea party federal judge down there in Texas is trying to write new law, that the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 applies to policy decisions of the Executive which are interpretive. The SCOTUS has always said not, and it said so again in February, unanimously.

The vulnerability of the far right in this case is obvious. The tea party judge is an activist judge. The far right and conservatives in general 100% denounce "activist" judges. But not this activist judge. Not this tea party activist judge who's trying to invent new law again in immigration law.

The federal judges in the cases of gay marriage have been constitutionally consistent and the SCOTUS has clearly indicated it will confirm that by mid-this year. This activist judge on the tea party right is wrong, and SCOTUS will confirm that too when it gets the case. That can be said because the SCOTUS case law precedents are 100% against this tea party activist judge, another precedent having occurred unanimously in February this year.

The tea party people disapprove of activist constitutional judges but approve of tea party activists political judges. That is the contradiction that needs pointing out in this case and political instance.

[Publicus]

It's not only the Mexicans any more, all of Latin America, Asians(Chinese,Koreans,Thais,etc etc) all got the idea that everything there is free,medical,food stamps,education,housing,etc etc. Just a small sampling from our Amphur there are numberous Thais that went there years ago on tourist visas and have been working ever since, for cash, no taxes, no social security deductions, no other taxes paid out either, but sending money back home and bragging how rich they are. When they do finally want to return they just buy a plane ticket and return, try that here on an overstay and see if they just let you go home Scott free, no way they fine the hell out of you and that is the law the way my dumbass government should do it.

so very true, I feel more a foreigner in my own country now.

Some people self-deport, to paraphrase another Republican concerning immigration and the whole nine yards of it.

Self-deport due to evolved and continually evolving society and culture.

They prefer going to a country that puts the people in their place and keeps 'em there.

They like peace and order instead.

[snarky66]

And that is why to cast a vote in the state of California is meaningless. Numerous times voters voted not to legalize gay marriage. But radical leftists merely took their case to some liberal activist judge and got what they been demanding. Thus to cast a vote in California is meaningless.

[cloudhopper]

And that is why to cast a vote in the state of California is meaningless. Numerous times voters voted not to legalize gay marriage. But radical leftists merely took their case to some liberal activist judge and got what they been demanding. Thus to cast a vote in California is meaningless.

Voting is meaningless everywhere now. It is just a tool to give a veil of legitimacy to the corrupt government. That is why voting is mandatory in some places, and why the president thinks mandatory voting is a good idea.

[JDGRUEN]

Very RECENT NEWS... May 26, 2015 - American Date

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has now spoken - No lifting of the Judge Hanen's stay on execution of the disguised unilateral unconstitutional Amnesty attempt. The Obama Administration may file an emergency request to reverse the Appeals Court and the lower court's actions with the Supreme Court - but conservative Judge Scalia receives all such request from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals - so it would likely be denied a hearing. So this underhanded Amnesty attempt will likely die in a long sleep ... Hallelujah !!!

Federal appeals court deals blow to President Obama’s amnesty

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit sided with a lower court that ruled Mr. Obama probably broke the law in taking unilateral action last year to grant an amnesty from deportation. The three-judge panel, ruling 2-1, shot down Mr. Obama’s hopes of quickly restarting the amnesty, and make it likely he’ll have to go to the Supreme Court to try to win his case.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/26/appeals-court-deals-blow-obama-amnesty/

[Ulysses G.]

No unconstitutional amnesty. Good news!

[JDGRUEN]

Here is Mark Levin's long drawn out analysis .. .he was a Reagan staff assistant - an arch Conservative and an expert of Federal court proceedings.

A long drawn out Listen - but quite precise for much of it -- not like rambling Rush - audio only BUT well worth it ... Mark Levin as you may know has millions of Americans as his listening AM Radio audience. Thank God we have people like Mark Levin.

http://therightscoop.com/mark-levin-explains-todays-federal-court-smack-down-of-obamas-illegal-amnesty-like-only-he-can/

[sdanielmcev]

A good day when the rule of law is upheld.

[JDGRUEN]

Note: Any move to take the 5th. Circuit Court of Appeals Decision to SCOTUS - Justice Scalia will review it — he will likely turn it down for a full SCOTUS hearing ... send it back to the Appeals Court and to Judge Hanen at the District court - where it would await a full trail - that could take until past obama’s term in office... So - the unconstitutional amnesty obama tried to sneak into existence would basically die

Unless the Fool tries to blatantly continue - whereupon contempt charges will be filed — against the Sec DHS and the Lawyers and others... but not likely against obama.

Judge Hanen should hire body guards ... and use crypto on his phone...

[chuckd]

The Lynch Justice Department won't be trying to lynch the tea party Judge Hanen from the backwaters of Texas.

They have decided to let the case work its way through the lower courts before they face the Supreme Court.

Probably a wise move while hoping the Supreme Court will overlook the DOJ lawyers lying to Judge Hanen originally.

Or could it be that Judge Hanen was correct all the time in his interpretation of the suit.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Immigration Overhaul May Be in Limbo Until Late in Obama’s Term

By MICHAEL D. SHEARMAY 27, 2015

WASHINGTON — President Obama’s overhaul of the nation’s immigration system, which he announced in a prime-time speech to the nation last November, may remain under a cloud of legal uncertainty until months before he leaves office in 2017, legal experts and administration officials said Wednesday.

Officials from the Justice Department said in a statement that they would not ask the Supreme Court for permission to carry out the president’s immigration programs — which seek to provide work permits and deportation protection to millions of undocumented immigrants — while a fight over presidential authority plays out in the lower courts.

That legal battle may extend for a year or more, officials said, undermining any hope of putting the president’s plan into effect until right before the 2016 election.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/28/us/obama-immigration-executive-action-supreme-court.html

[Publicus]

The Lynch Justice Department won't be trying to lynch the tea party Judge Hanen from the backwaters of Texas.

They have decided to let the case work its way through the lower courts before they face the Supreme Court.

Probably a wise move while hoping the Supreme Court will overlook the DOJ lawyers lying to Judge Hanen originally.

Or could it be that Judge Hanen was correct all the time in his interpretation of the suit.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Immigration Overhaul May Be in Limbo Until Late in Obama’s Term

By MICHAEL D. SHEARMAY 27, 2015

WASHINGTON — President Obama’s overhaul of the nation’s immigration system, which he announced in a prime-time speech to the nation last November, may remain under a cloud of legal uncertainty until months before he leaves office in 2017, legal experts and administration officials said Wednesday.

Officials from the Justice Department said in a statement that they would not ask the Supreme Court for permission to carry out the president’s immigration programs — which seek to provide work permits and deportation protection to millions of undocumented immigrants — while a fight over presidential authority plays out in the lower courts.

That legal battle may extend for a year or more, officials said, undermining any hope of putting the president’s plan into effect until right before the 2016 election.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/28/us/obama-immigration-executive-action-supreme-court.html

To neutralize the immigration executive action is all the Republicans and the far right that controls the R party wanted from this suit. As with any suit, this one will take two to three years to get before SCOTUS and it was filed last year.

Meantime, the 26 states led by Texas chose their pet federal judge down Texas way, in the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas and who, in 2013, carried on a year long rant in his court against immigration and against the Obama administration.

The appeals court of jurisdiction is the US 5th Circuit Court of Appeals which sits in New Orleans and is decidedly and traditionally the most conservative Republican party judge dominated court in the federal system.

The 2-1 ruling put two Republican appointed appeals judges against one Democratic appointed one, so it's entirely predictable. In fact, the two judges ignored SCOTUS decisions completely and they completely contradicted their own full 5th Circuit immigration rulings that are only entirely consistent with SCOTUS.

But no mind because this as with everything else since the election in 2008 is political, entirely political. Stall Prez Obama's immigration executive action until it doesn't matter any more. The administration meanwhile has pretty much decided to keep handing these guys as much rope with Hispanic and other voters as they will take in, and the right are hauling away while singing and laughing. .

[Publicus]

No unconstitutional amnesty. Good news!

The ruling the other day was on the temporary injunction issued by Judge Hanen and the injunction only. The temporary injunction will remain, temporarily.

Judge Hanen himself did not rule on the constitutionality of the immigration executive order, he ruled on the Administrative Procedures Act of 1946 and that is the legal issue and question. The trial when it comes will be about the executive action and the APA. There is no Constitutional question at all.

Judge Hanen himself in his legal memorandum discussing and explaining the injunction said there is no question of amnesty to rule on, that there is no "amnesty" in the immigration executive action. There is no amnesty in the immigration order.

The post is 100% right wing rhetoric and make-believe.

Edited May 28, 2015 by Publicus

[Ulysses G.]

No unconstitutional amnesty. Good news!

The ruling the other day was on the temporary injunction issued by Judge Hanen and the injunction only.

There is an excellent chance that the he temporary injunction will have a permanent effect.

Ruling puts Obama's immigration legacy in jeopardy

Latest legal blow could put final decision close to the end of his presidency

By Josh Gerstein and Adam B. Lerner | 5/26/15 2:54 PM EDT | Updated 5/26/15 8:47 PM EDT

A series of setbacks and delays in the key legal challenge to President Barack Obama’s executive actions on immigration could irreparably damage his legacy on the issue, even if the Supreme Court ultimately upholds his authority to act.

The latest blow came Tuesday as a three-judge appeals court panel voted, 2-1, to deny the administration’s request to proceed with Obama’s plan to grant quasi-legal status and work permits to millions more illegal immigrants while litigation over those actions plays out.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/barack-obama-executive-action-immigration-setback-appeals-court-118290.html#ixzz3bR2SjoYN

[chuckd]

I will give Obama credit for one thing.

He claimed 22 times he didn't have the legal authority to change immigration laws. He was right.

It would seem some federal judges agree with him on that matter.

[Publicus]

The right is overanxious about the immigration order in the courts as it needs to respect the fact the whole of SCOTUS isn't anywhere near getting the case and won't be hearing the case for at least a year, probably 18 months before deciding it if not more.

The right and other Republicans need to keep their powder dry in this respect because when SCOTUS does decide the case the right will need to surrender its gunpowder and we on this side like dry powder.

That the right and other Republicans are frantic Barack Obama as with any president will have a personal legacy speaks to the personal nature of the right's rash opposition to him and to his presidency. It's been strictly personal, black and white simple and absolutely nothing to do with business.

[Publicus]

Note: Any move to take the 5th. Circuit Court of Appeals Decision to SCOTUS - Justice Scalia will review it — he will likely turn it down for a full SCOTUS hearing ... send it back to the Appeals Court and to Judge Hanen at the District court - where it would await a full trail - that could take until past obama’s term in office... So - the unconstitutional amnesty obama tried to sneak into existence would basically die

Unless the Fool tries to blatantly continue - whereupon contempt charges will be filed — against the Sec DHS and the Lawyers and others... but not likely against obama.

Judge Hanen should hire body guards ... and use crypto on his phone...

The appeals court's 2-1 ruling Tuesday was against the DoJ request of an emergency stay/stop of the injunction issued by the tea party Judge Hanen.

A different three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit has however set Saturday, June 6th for a hearing on the DoJ request to stop the injunction itself. I say, that's on a Saturday.

It's too soon to talk about SCOTUS itself or about Justice Scalia because the injunction is still with the appeals court that sits in New Orleans.

So keep your powder dry.

[JDGRUEN]

The Republicans - that is the RINOs Republicans in Name Only at the helm of the U.S. Senate and the House are not trying to stymie the President on his unconstitutional act to attempt to backdoor Amnesty ... Quite the oppposite they are supporting him ... Much to the irritation of Conservatives in Congress and in the States. It is the Conservative and Moderate Republicans in the States - 26 of them that has stuck it to Obama and are proud of it ... And we Conservative warriors - far and wide in America support those 26 states and cheer them on .... Hallelujah Brother !!!

Liberals and Leftists who cheer Obama on in his quest to backdoor Amnesty using unconstitutional means had best beware ... it sets a precedence if it were left to stand that a Conservative President in the future could also bypass Congress and do as he wishes ... Do you liberals and Leftists really want a Conservative to have Presidential unilateral power - accepted by a passive Congress to made Executive level decisions on gay marriage, the status of illegal aliens, the status of Obamacare, etc?... Do you really want to set that standard of precedence? Really?

Edited May 28, 2015 by JDGRUEN

[Publicus]

I will give Obama credit for one thing.

He claimed 22 times he didn't have the legal authority to change immigration laws. He was right.

It would seem some federal judges agree with him on that matter.

Thanks much indeed because Prez Obama was in fact right, even if it took him up to 22 times to say it so the extreme right could comprehend it.

Prez Obama is right to (overly) reiterate that a president has no authority to change a law. Prez Obama never intended to change the immigration law or laws, and Prez Obama did nothing that affects or changes any immigration laws.

The president instructed the Secretary of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnston, to defer deportations in certain instances of illegal immigrants, specifically, the immigrant parents of minor children citizens born to them in the United States.

No law has been changed. The Executive Branch has in fact exercised executive discretion in executing existing laws as per the Constitution and SCOTUS.

Judge Hanen's creative beef is about observing the Administrative Procedures Act of 1946. Judge Hanen made no ruling on the Constitution, none whatsoever. Same for amnesty, ditto, as the judge said specifically amnesty is not in the executive action.

The flying right wing has however been getting away for much too long with its erroneous and politically motivated, baseless claims. There is no amnesty but more specifically, no law of any kind has been changed by the immigration executive action. None. Not a one. So the right is right that the president is right.

The right is wrong about the tea party federal judge down there in Texas however because the APA does not apply to policy actions of the executive....SCOTUS has already said so in other cases over several decades.

Aside from the final point about the judge, I must say that when you're right, you're right.

[Ulysses G.]

Prez Obama is right to (overly) reiterate that a president has no authority to change a law. Prez Obama never intended to change the immigration law or laws, and Prez Obama did nothing that affects or changes any immigration laws.

That spin is worthy of Baghdad Bob, but I believe what he said the other 22 times.

Edited May 29, 2015 by Ulysses G.