Judge rules Trump administration within authority in separating families at border

[The Purge]

A federal judge ruled Monday that the Trump administration is operating within its authority when separating families stopped at the Mexican border, rejecting arguments that it was quietly returning to widespread practices that drew international condemnation.

U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw indicated he was uncomfortable second-guessing government decisions to separate children on grounds that parents were considered unfit or dangerous, or in other limited circumstances like criminal history, communicable diseases and doubts about parentage. He found no evidence that the government was abusing its discretion.

"It is an invitation that is potentially massive in scope, invades an area that is particularly within the province of the Executive Branch to secure the Nation's border, and goes beyond this Court's class certification and preliminary injunction orders, which were focused on the Administration's practice of separating families at the border for the purpose of deterring immigration, and failing to reunify those families," Sabraw wrote in a 26-page decision.

It was a rare instance of the San Diego judge siding with the administration. In June 2018, he halted the practice of separating families under a "zero tolerance" policy to deter illegal immigration and ordered they be quickly reunited. Lack of adequate tracking systems at the time made reunification a monumental task.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...

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

Refreshing to see a federal judge go by what is Constitutional instead of how he/she FEELS about a case!

 

[Shawnee_b]

Gee. How they get to that? Cause Obama did it first?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Just because it may be within his authority doesn't necessarily mean it should be done

 

[easyt65]

The self-professed Constitutional Scholar did it, so it must be legal.

 

[Jitss617]

Just because it may be within his authority doesn't necessarily mean it should be done

Don t come here

 

[OKTexas]

A federal judge ruled Monday that the Trump administration is operating within its authority when separating families stopped at the Mexican border, rejecting arguments that it was quietly returning to widespread practices that drew international condemnation.

U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw indicated he was uncomfortable second-guessing government decisions to separate children on grounds that parents were considered unfit or dangerous, or in other limited circumstances like criminal history, communicable diseases and doubts about parentage. He found no evidence that the government was abusing its discretion.

"It is an invitation that is potentially massive in scope, invades an area that is particularly within the province of the Executive Branch to secure the Nation's border, and goes beyond this Court's class certification and preliminary injunction orders, which were focused on the Administration's practice of separating families at the border for the purpose of deterring immigration, and failing to reunify those families," Sabraw wrote in a 26-page decision.

It was a rare instance of the San Diego judge siding with the administration. In June 2018, he halted the practice of separating families under a "zero tolerance" policy to deter illegal immigration and ordered they be quickly reunited. Lack of adequate tracking systems at the time made reunification a monumental task.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...

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

Refreshing to see a federal judge go by what is Constitutional instead of how he/she FEELS about a case!

Yep, it's well within the administrations discretion.

.

 

[Dick Foster]

A federal judge ruled Monday that the Trump administration is operating within its authority when separating families stopped at the Mexican border, rejecting arguments that it was quietly returning to widespread practices that drew international condemnation.

U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw indicated he was uncomfortable second-guessing government decisions to separate children on grounds that parents were considered unfit or dangerous, or in other limited circumstances like criminal history, communicable diseases and doubts about parentage. He found no evidence that the government was abusing its discretion.

"It is an invitation that is potentially massive in scope, invades an area that is particularly within the province of the Executive Branch to secure the Nation's border, and goes beyond this Court's class certification and preliminary injunction orders, which were focused on the Administration's practice of separating families at the border for the purpose of deterring immigration, and failing to reunify those families," Sabraw wrote in a 26-page decision.

It was a rare instance of the San Diego judge siding with the administration. In June 2018, he halted the practice of separating families under a "zero tolerance" policy to deter illegal immigration and ordered they be quickly reunited. Lack of adequate tracking systems at the time made reunification a monumental task.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...

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

Refreshing to see a federal judge go by what is Constitutional instead of how he/she FEELS about a case!

Oh well, another day another win. So much winning but I'm still not tired of it.

 

[Crixus]

Just because it may be within his authority doesn't necessarily mean it should be done

Sure it should. When people are arrested for breaking the law and they have children in their possession then those children are handled in one of two ways.

1. A family member is called to pick up the kids or,
2. If the family is unfit, unable or unwilling to get the kids they go to CPS custody which is typically a foster home until it's all ironed out.

There is also the fact that children are being rented out just for this type of shit.

 

[Crixus]

A federal judge ruled Monday that the Trump administration is operating within its authority when separating families stopped at the Mexican border, rejecting arguments that it was quietly returning to widespread practices that drew international condemnation.

U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw indicated he was uncomfortable second-guessing government decisions to separate children on grounds that parents were considered unfit or dangerous, or in other limited circumstances like criminal history, communicable diseases and doubts about parentage. He found no evidence that the government was abusing its discretion.

"It is an invitation that is potentially massive in scope, invades an area that is particularly within the province of the Executive Branch to secure the Nation's border, and goes beyond this Court's class certification and preliminary injunction orders, which were focused on the Administration's practice of separating families at the border for the purpose of deterring immigration, and failing to reunify those families," Sabraw wrote in a 26-page decision.

It was a rare instance of the San Diego judge siding with the administration. In June 2018, he halted the practice of separating families under a "zero tolerance" policy to deter illegal immigration and ordered they be quickly reunited. Lack of adequate tracking systems at the time made reunification a monumental task.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...

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

Refreshing to see a federal judge go by what is Constitutional instead of how he/she FEELS about a case!

Don't matter anyway. They still just turn them all loose in the end.

 

[occupied]

My read on this is that the judge said the authority exists for proper cause. However trying to use it as a sadistic form of deterrence is not proper cause.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Wasnt the whole kids in cages thing explained? It was that the processing centers were over full, so they had no place else to put them. Isnt that what happened?

 

[lennypartiv]

Just because it may be within his authority doesn't necessarily mean it should be done

It's a deterrent. Anything that can be done to keep Hispanics on the south side of the border should be done.

 

[buckeye45_73]

My read on this is that the judge said the authority exists for proper cause. However trying to use it as a sadistic form of deterrence is not proper cause.

yeah let the kiddies get raped on their way, lefties love them some sickos, they want to register them all to vote