Posted April 10, 2015 4:52 PM ET; Last updated May 26, 2015 6:37 PM ET
Are judges shocked that lawyers lie? This is the pervasive pattern in media. Journalists ignore facts, and publish advocacy for social issues to please liberal elitists in government. Useful idiots try to destroy the nation assisting extremist leftists. They fail to keep ordinary voters and taxpayers informed. They are publishing propaganda not news. Under the Obama-Holder doctrine laws are optional. Inconvenient laws may be ignored by selected persons. The courts are being used for "social justice" not legal justice in support leftist media propaganda.
[From article]
The lawsuit was filed in December and on Feb. 16, Judge Andrew S. Hanen,of Federal District Court in Brownsville ordered a preliminary injunctionon the programs while he ruled on the constitutional issues in the suit.
In a statement, Ken Paxton, the attorney general of Texas, said Mr. Obama had tried to impose “a drastic change in immigration policy” without the consent of Congress. The appeals court decision is “a victory for those committed to preserving the rule of law in America,” Mr. Paxton said. “We will continue to fight the brazen lawlessness that has become a trademark of the Obama administration.”
White House officials said the ruling was not surprising, but they declined to discuss the next legal move for the administration.
“Today, two judges of the Fifth Circuit chose to misrepresent the facts and the law,” a White House spokeswoman, Brandi Hoffine, said. “The president’s actions were designed to bring greater accountability to our broken immigration system, grow the economy and keep our communities safe. They are squarely within the bounds of his authority and they are the right thing to do for the country.”
The Justice Department could appeal the ruling on the emergency stay to the full appeals court, but legal experts said it was more likely that the administration would skip that conservative court and ask the Supreme Court to allow the programs to proceed.
The legal wrangling suggests that Mr. Obama and his aides may have underestimated the legal and political challenges to offering protections to more than four million illegal immigrants without a congressional vote.http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/27/us/fifth-circuit-court-of-appeals-rules-on-obama-immigration-plan.html?_r=0
Appeals Court Denies Bid to Let Obama Immigration Plan Proceed
By JULIA PRESTON
In a statement, Ken Paxton, the attorney general of Texas, said Mr. Obama had tried to impose “a drastic change in immigration policy” without the consent of Congress. The appeals court decision is “a victory for those committed to preserving the rule of law in America,” Mr. Paxton said. “We will continue to fight the brazen lawlessness that has become a trademark of the Obama administration.”
White House officials said the ruling was not surprising, but they declined to discuss the next legal move for the administration.
“Today, two judges of the Fifth Circuit chose to misrepresent the facts and the law,” a White House spokeswoman, Brandi Hoffine, said. “The president’s actions were designed to bring greater accountability to our broken immigration system, grow the economy and keep our communities safe. They are squarely within the bounds of his authority and they are the right thing to do for the country.”
The Justice Department could appeal the ruling on the emergency stay to the full appeals court, but legal experts said it was more likely that the administration would skip that conservative court and ask the Supreme Court to allow the programs to proceed.
The legal wrangling suggests that Mr. Obama and his aides may have underestimated the legal and political challenges to offering protections to more than four million illegal immigrants without a congressional vote.http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/27/us/fifth-circuit-court-of-appeals-rules-on-obama-immigration-plan.html?_r=0
Appeals Court Denies Bid to Let Obama Immigration Plan Proceed
By JULIA PRESTON
MAY 26, 2015
New York Times
* * *
[From article]
Throughout Barack Obama’s tenure in the White House he’s been accused of leading a lawless presidency and cheapening the rule of law through his Department of Justice. Many say these accusations are simply based in politics, but a closer look at the way the Department of Justice has handled multiple cases in federal court suggest misleading or lying to judges is a habit, not a mistake.
[. . .]
Twenty-six states are suing against the action, and in February, U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Hanen issued a stay in the implementation of the order granting temporary amnesty and work permits to millions of illegal immigrants. Shortly after blocking the implementation, Hanen found out DOJ attorneys had issued false information to the court. He accused them of misleading the court because Immigration and Customs Enforcement, under DOJ guidance, had ignored his order to halt implementation and gave temporary amnesty and work permits to more than 100,000 people.
[. . .]
Late last year, U.S. District Court Judge Francis Allegra accused DOJ attorneys of not only being misleading in their arguments but of defrauding the court in the case of retired Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent Jay Dobyns, in Jay Dobyns v. United States of America.
[. . .]
When it was discovered in 2013 that the Justice Department was monitoring the private phone lines and emails of Fox News chief Washington correspondent James Rosen and his parents, there were many questions surrounding how the DOJ was able to get approval from a judge to do. The department claimed in an affidavit that Rosen was a criminal co-conspirator who had potentially broken the law and committed a crime for seeking classified information from a source. But when the DOJ was caught monitoring him, it argued plans to prosecute Rosen were never in the works. Did DOJ attorneys lie to a federal judge about the “criminal co-conspirator” classification in order to get court approval to monitor him and his sources?
[. . .]
Attorney General Eric Holder’s Department of Justice has been willing to mislead federal judges, ignore court orders and allegedly defraud the court so long as political goals of the White House are reached. This is the rule, not the exception.
http://thehill.com/opinion/katie-pavlich/238002-katie-pavlich-the-deception-of-the-obama-department-of-justice
Katie Pavlich: The deception of the Obama Department of Justice
By Katie Pavlich
New York Times
* * *
[From article]
Throughout Barack Obama’s tenure in the White House he’s been accused of leading a lawless presidency and cheapening the rule of law through his Department of Justice. Many say these accusations are simply based in politics, but a closer look at the way the Department of Justice has handled multiple cases in federal court suggest misleading or lying to judges is a habit, not a mistake.
[. . .]
Twenty-six states are suing against the action, and in February, U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Hanen issued a stay in the implementation of the order granting temporary amnesty and work permits to millions of illegal immigrants. Shortly after blocking the implementation, Hanen found out DOJ attorneys had issued false information to the court. He accused them of misleading the court because Immigration and Customs Enforcement, under DOJ guidance, had ignored his order to halt implementation and gave temporary amnesty and work permits to more than 100,000 people.
[. . .]
Late last year, U.S. District Court Judge Francis Allegra accused DOJ attorneys of not only being misleading in their arguments but of defrauding the court in the case of retired Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent Jay Dobyns, in Jay Dobyns v. United States of America.
[. . .]
When it was discovered in 2013 that the Justice Department was monitoring the private phone lines and emails of Fox News chief Washington correspondent James Rosen and his parents, there were many questions surrounding how the DOJ was able to get approval from a judge to do. The department claimed in an affidavit that Rosen was a criminal co-conspirator who had potentially broken the law and committed a crime for seeking classified information from a source. But when the DOJ was caught monitoring him, it argued plans to prosecute Rosen were never in the works. Did DOJ attorneys lie to a federal judge about the “criminal co-conspirator” classification in order to get court approval to monitor him and his sources?
[. . .]
Attorney General Eric Holder’s Department of Justice has been willing to mislead federal judges, ignore court orders and allegedly defraud the court so long as political goals of the White House are reached. This is the rule, not the exception.
http://thehill.com/opinion/katie-pavlich/238002-katie-pavlich-the-deception-of-the-obama-department-of-justice
Katie Pavlich: The deception of the Obama Department of Justice
By Katie Pavlich
04/06/15 05:00 PM EDT
No comments:
Post a Comment