Second judge rules against Trump administration on ending DACA

[shockedcanadian]

So many working hard to take the power out of the presidents hands. The courts are telling America you must agree to have illegal immigration within your country, and tkes away any leverage he has in negotiations. Disgusting.

Second judge rules against Trump administration on ending DACA

For the second time in as many months, a federal judge has barred the Trump administration from ending the Obama-era DACA program next month.

U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis in New York ruled that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had "erred in concluding that DACA is unconstitutional" and granted a preliminary injunction sought by state attorney generals and immigrants who had sued the administration.

The Justice Department had no immediate comment on Garaufis' ruling.

Last month, U.S. District Judge William Alsup in San Francisco ruled that DACA must remain in place while litigation surrounding the program is ongoing. The U.S. Supreme Court is currently considering whether to take up the Trump administration's appeal of that ruling.

Trump announced last this past September that he was ending the DACA, or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, program. The move gave Congress a March 5 deadline to create a legislative replacement for the program, but was almost immediately challenged in court.

The White House has sought increased funding for border security, including a wall across the U.S.-Mexico border, in exchange for providing a path to citizenship for 1.8 million immigrants.

 

[Anathema]

It would be a shame if the names and addresses of these Dreamers and DACA recipients became public and their homes accidentally burned down.

 

[jillian]

So many working hard to take the power out of the presidents hands. The courts are telling America you must agree to have illegal immigration within your country, and tkes away any leverage he has in negotiations. Disgusting.

Second judge rules against Trump administration on ending DACA

For the second time in as many months, a federal judge has barred the Trump administration from ending the Obama-era DACA program next month.

U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis in New York ruled that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had "erred in concluding that DACA is unconstitutional" and granted a preliminary injunction sought by state attorney generals and immigrants who had sued the administration.

The Justice Department had no immediate comment on Garaufis' ruling.

Last month, U.S. District Judge William Alsup in San Francisco ruled that DACA must remain in place while litigation surrounding the program is ongoing. The U.S. Supreme Court is currently considering whether to take up the Trump administration's appeal of that ruling.

Trump announced last this past September that he was ending the DACA, or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, program. The move gave Congress a March 5 deadline to create a legislative replacement for the program, but was almost immediately challenged in court.

The White House has sought increased funding for border security, including a wall across the U.S.-Mexico border, in exchange for providing a path to citizenship for 1.8 million immigrants.

so many working hard to make sure the president isn't a petty ugly bigoted little dictator.

are you sad? don't cry, whiny trumpflake.

 

[shockedcanadian]

So many working hard to take the power out of the presidents hands. The courts are telling America you must agree to have illegal immigration within your country, and tkes away any leverage he has in negotiations. Disgusting.

Second judge rules against Trump administration on ending DACA

For the second time in as many months, a federal judge has barred the Trump administration from ending the Obama-era DACA program next month.

U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis in New York ruled that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had "erred in concluding that DACA is unconstitutional" and granted a preliminary injunction sought by state attorney generals and immigrants who had sued the administration.

The Justice Department had no immediate comment on Garaufis' ruling.

Last month, U.S. District Judge William Alsup in San Francisco ruled that DACA must remain in place while litigation surrounding the program is ongoing. The U.S. Supreme Court is currently considering whether to take up the Trump administration's appeal of that ruling.

Trump announced last this past September that he was ending the DACA, or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, program. The move gave Congress a March 5 deadline to create a legislative replacement for the program, but was almost immediately challenged in court.

The White House has sought increased funding for border security, including a wall across the U.S.-Mexico border, in exchange for providing a path to citizenship for 1.8 million immigrants.

so many working hard to make sure the president isn't a petty ugly bigoted little dictator.

are you sad? don't cry, whiny trumpflake.

That's an interesting tactic, but Obama himself acknowledged it was unconstitutional, it was designed to be a short term fix, though he probably knew it would be a long term democratic boost in voters.

What is to stop ANYONE from just going to America and telling judges they need to protect their right to stay in America, "just because"? There is no reasonable logic in this.

 

[AZGAL]

District judges have no power to decide on an immigration directive. If it comes down to it of course Congress can cut all funding for DACA and it's administrators. No free tacos and no extra governmental overhead.

 

[JGalt]

Obama's special consideration for DACA shitheads wasn't a law: It was merely an executive order he signed. Therefore the district judge should have his dick slapped.

 

[AZGAL]

President Trump did not sign Obamas exec order. In theory Trump is unsigning it.

 

[Tijn Von Ingersleben]

Activist judges doing activist judge stuff.

 

[DOTR]

are you sad? don't cry, whiny trumpflake.

That was Judge Garaufis. Wonder what kind of name Garaufis is? ha ha kidding. Little doubt there...whatd'ya want a yarmulke?

Anyhow, this nutty judge is a Clinton appointee. He has ordered the New York Fire Department to cease testing applicants for admission because apparently blacks cant pass tests that require literacy. Instead he ordered that three out of five new hires be non white. As a result injuries (with disability pay) skyrocketed and the failure rate of Fire Academy students doubled. Before he could do any more damage a Federal panel removed him from the case and negated his rulings.
Federal Judge Imposes Racial Quota on FDNY, Responding to Minorities Who Failed Entrance Exams
Appeals Court Says Judge Went Too Far in Forcing Fire Dept. to Revamp Its Hiring

Judge Garaufis was also censored and forced to back down after he sentenced a woman to a lifetime of court duty because he found her jury questionnaire "racist". "
"Obnoxious opinions are not criminal" said NYU law Professor Stephen Gillers."She can't be punished for being a racist," Gillers said. "You don't check the First Amendment at the courtroom door."
Judge lets jury duty 'racist' off hook

He has been known to go on tirades when he isn't shown the proper obsequiousness he feels he should be. Especially if they hobnob with Facebook and not him.

"Federal Judge Nicholas Garaufis went on an epic rant Thursday against the white-shoe firm Kirkland & Ellis for sending a rookie lawyer to defend media giant Facebook against two lawsuits..."You tell your folks back at Kirkland & Ellis that if they think so little of this court that they didn't send a partner here...
Burcher sputtered that the lead counsel on the case was called away to Texas yesterday on a legal emergency.
"Maybe Kirkland & Ellis can scrounge up a partner who isn't busy in Texas to come see a lowly judge in the Eastern District of New York," Garaufis shot back...The judge abruptly ended the conference..."I want to talk to someone (at the law firm) who talks to senior management at Facebook,” he said.
Brooklyn Judge unfriends top NYC law firm defending Facebook


Now we were lucky to grow up in a Western derived culture which respect the rule of law. The Garaufis and Schumers and Schiffs and Feinsteins are chiseling away at that. When this case came before him Judge Garaufis meticulously studied the points of law and ruled on the merits...haha just kidding again...he said "It's unacceptable to me, quite frankly, as a human being and as an American....You can't come into court to espouse a position that is heartless."
Brooklyn judge rips feds over refusal to change DACA deadline

In the end he ruled that the President must ignore Congress and the immigration laws they passed and act unilaterally against the American people.

Trump cant replace these Marxists soon enough.

 

[Care4all]

I suppose this is an example of what our Founders meant by their creation of :

3 EQUAL branches of government,

Judicial, Congress, and the President?

No one, is greater or more powerful than the other?

Reminds me of Carol King's song, Sweet Seasons,


Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose
And most times you choose between the two

 

[JGalt]

I suppose this is an example of what our Founders meant by their creation of :

3 EQUAL branches of government,

Judicial, Congress, and the President?

No one, is greater or more powerful than the other?

Reminds me of Carol King's song, Sweet Seasons,


Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose
And most times you choose between the two

This is not how "separation of powers" was intended to work. Any executive order from any president can cancel an existing executive order of another president. Even the asshole Obama who wrote the original DACA executive order publicly admitted that it was illegal for him to write in the first place. Hell, it wasn't even an executive order, it was a fucking memo.

Activist hack judges who uphold illegal memos like that one should be charged with obstruction when they purposely make unconstitutional “judgements” like this, because it definitely is judicial over-reach. The Judicial branch of the United States government has no authority to tell the Executive branch that he has to extend a previous President's memos as if they were laws.

 

[Care4all]

I suppose this is an example of what our Founders meant by their creation of :

3 EQUAL branches of government,

Judicial, Congress, and the President?

No one, is greater or more powerful than the other?

Reminds me of Carol King's song, Sweet Seasons,


Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose
And most times you choose between the two

This is not how "separation of powers" was intended to work. Any executive order from any president can cancel an existing executive order of another president. Even the asshole Obama who wrote the original DACA executive order publicly admitted that it was illegal for him to write in the first place. Hell, it wasn't even an executive order, it was a fucking memo.

Activist hack judges who uphold illegal memos like that one should be charged with obstruction when they purposely make unconstitutional “judgements” like this, because it definitely is judicial over-reach. The Judicial branch of the United States government has no authority to tell the Executive branch that he has to extend a previous President's memos as if they were laws.

From my understanding, the Judge ruled that the arbitrary March 6 cut off, was not in effect because the congress was in the process of negotiating with the President on legislating a solution.

The cut off date would make them eligible to be deported and it would or could make them lose their jobs, etc....when a legislative solution was just around the corner...Trump's plan was to keep 1.8 million Dreamers, which he had announced......

the Judge did the only thing the Judge could do....under the circumstances.

 

[DOTR]

I suppose this is an example of what our Founders meant by their creation of :

3 EQUAL branches of government,

Judicial, Congress, and the President?

No one, is greater or more powerful than the other?

Reminds me of Carol King's song, Sweet Seasons,


Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose
And most times you choose between the two

This judge’s ruling should be ignored and he himself removed of Congress and the President can agree to do it.

 

[DOTR]

I suppose this is an example of what our Founders meant by their creation of :

3 EQUAL branches of government,

Judicial, Congress, and the President?

No one, is greater or more powerful than the other?

Reminds me of Carol King's song, Sweet Seasons,


Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose
And most times you choose between the two

This is not how "separation of powers" was intended to work. Any executive order from any president can cancel an existing executive order of another president. Even the asshole Obama who wrote the original DACA executive order publicly admitted that it was illegal for him to write in the first place. Hell, it wasn't even an executive order, it was a fucking memo.

Activist hack judges who uphold illegal memos like that one should be charged with obstruction when they purposely make unconstitutional “judgements” like this, because it definitely is judicial over-reach. The Judicial branch of the United States government has no authority to tell the Executive branch that he has to extend a previous President's memos as if they were laws.

From my understanding, the Judge ruled that the arbitrary March 6 cut off, was not in effect because the congress was in the process of negotiating with the President on legislating a solution.

The cut off date would make them eligible to be deported and it would or could make them lose their jobs, etc....when a legislative solution was just around the corner...Trump's plan was to keep 1.8 million Dreamers, which he had announced......

the Judge did the only thing the Judge could do....under the circumstances.

That’s a lie. There is already a legislative solution. Congress passed immigration laws which make it illegal to sneak across the border.

 

[Care4all]

I suppose this is an example of what our Founders meant by their creation of :

3 EQUAL branches of government,

Judicial, Congress, and the President?

No one, is greater or more powerful than the other?

Reminds me of Carol King's song, Sweet Seasons,


Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose
And most times you choose between the two

This is not how "separation of powers" was intended to work. Any executive order from any president can cancel an existing executive order of another president. Even the asshole Obama who wrote the original DACA executive order publicly admitted that it was illegal for him to write in the first place. Hell, it wasn't even an executive order, it was a fucking memo.

Activist hack judges who uphold illegal memos like that one should be charged with obstruction when they purposely make unconstitutional “judgements” like this, because it definitely is judicial over-reach. The Judicial branch of the United States government has no authority to tell the Executive branch that he has to extend a previous President's memos as if they were laws.

From my understanding, the Judge ruled that the arbitrary March 6 cut off, was not in effect because the congress was in the process of negotiating with the President on legislating a solution.

The cut off date would make them eligible to be deported and it would or could make them lose their jobs, etc....when a legislative solution was just around the corner...Trump's plan was to keep 1.8 million Dreamers, which he had announced......

the Judge did the only thing the Judge could do....under the circumstances.

That’s a lie. There is already a legislative solution. Congress passed immigration laws which make it illegal to sneak across the border.

we don't charge children for the crimes of their parents in this nation, NONE of DACA/Dreamers broke any immigration laws...?

So I have no idea what you are talking about???

 

[DOTR]

I suppose this is an example of what our Founders meant by their creation of :

3 EQUAL branches of government,

Judicial, Congress, and the President?

No one, is greater or more powerful than the other?

Reminds me of Carol King's song, Sweet Seasons,


Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose
And most times you choose between the two

This is not how "separation of powers" was intended to work. Any executive order from any president can cancel an existing executive order of another president. Even the asshole Obama who wrote the original DACA executive order publicly admitted that it was illegal for him to write in the first place. Hell, it wasn't even an executive order, it was a fucking memo.

Activist hack judges who uphold illegal memos like that one should be charged with obstruction when they purposely make unconstitutional “judgements” like this, because it definitely is judicial over-reach. The Judicial branch of the United States government has no authority to tell the Executive branch that he has to extend a previous President's memos as if they were laws.

From my understanding, the Judge ruled that the arbitrary March 6 cut off, was not in effect because the congress was in the process of negotiating with the President on legislating a solution.

The cut off date would make them eligible to be deported and it would or could make them lose their jobs, etc....when a legislative solution was just around the corner...Trump's plan was to keep 1.8 million Dreamers, which he had announced......

the Judge did the only thing the Judge could do....under the circumstances.

That’s a lie. There is already a legislative solution. Congress passed immigration laws which make it illegal to sneak across the border.

we don't charge children for the crimes of their parents in this nation, NONE of DACA/Dreamers broke any immigration laws...?

So I have no idea what you are talking about???

Nope. We just send them back. That’s the law.

 

[Care4all]

I suppose this is an example of what our Founders meant by their creation of :

3 EQUAL branches of government,

Judicial, Congress, and the President?

No one, is greater or more powerful than the other?

Reminds me of Carol King's song, Sweet Seasons,


Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose
And most times you choose between the two

This judge’s ruling should be ignored and he himself removed of Congress and the President can agree to do it.

that's simply bulloney! And no the president has no part in a removal of a judge...

it would be an IMPEACHMENT process, including conviction in the Senate, with very high barriers, as with all Impeachments, including a President, is my understanding of it..

 

[Care4all]

I suppose this is an example of what our Founders meant by their creation of :

3 EQUAL branches of government,

Judicial, Congress, and the President?

No one, is greater or more powerful than the other?

Reminds me of Carol King's song, Sweet Seasons,


Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose
And most times you choose between the two

This is not how "separation of powers" was intended to work. Any executive order from any president can cancel an existing executive order of another president. Even the asshole Obama who wrote the original DACA executive order publicly admitted that it was illegal for him to write in the first place. Hell, it wasn't even an executive order, it was a fucking memo.

Activist hack judges who uphold illegal memos like that one should be charged with obstruction when they purposely make unconstitutional “judgements” like this, because it definitely is judicial over-reach. The Judicial branch of the United States government has no authority to tell the Executive branch that he has to extend a previous President's memos as if they were laws.

From my understanding, the Judge ruled that the arbitrary March 6 cut off, was not in effect because the congress was in the process of negotiating with the President on legislating a solution.

The cut off date would make them eligible to be deported and it would or could make them lose their jobs, etc....when a legislative solution was just around the corner...Trump's plan was to keep 1.8 million Dreamers, which he had announced......

the Judge did the only thing the Judge could do....under the circumstances.

That’s a lie. There is already a legislative solution. Congress passed immigration laws which make it illegal to sneak across the border.

we don't charge children for the crimes of their parents in this nation, NONE of DACA/Dreamers broke any immigration laws...?

So I have no idea what you are talking about???

Nope. We just send them back. That’s the law.

and NO ONE is going to do that, not even your President, who increased the number of who can stay from the 700,000 DACA's to 1.8 million, so to cover ALL Dreamers, even those who never filed for DACA

 

[DrLove]

So many working hard to take the power out of the presidents hands. The courts are telling America you must agree to have illegal immigration within your country, and tkes away any leverage he has in negotiations. Disgusting.

Good news - and mind your own biness eh?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Obama's special consideration for DACA shitheads wasn't a law: It was merely an executive order he signed. Therefore the district judge should have his dick slapped.

Watch your language!!! You're going to get Matthew all excited!