FrontPage: A federal judge, U.S. District Judge William Alsup, took it upon himself to order that the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program (DACA), put in place by former President Obama’s executive order and wound down towards ultimate termination by President Trump’s own executive order last September, must stay in place at least for the time being. The judge issued a preliminary injunction against ending DACA while lawsuits over President Trump’s decision go forward. The effect of Judge Alsup’s order is to throw out a temporary lifeline to the illegal immigrant “Dreamers” who have or have had DACA protection to be able to continue staying and working in the country while they apply for renewals.
Needless to say, President Trump was not happy with this latest example of judicial overreach.
“It just shows everyone how broken and unfair our Court System is when the opposing side in a case (such as DACA) always runs to the 9th Circuit and almost always wins before being reversed by higher courts,” President Trump tweeted, referring to the District Court judge from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
Judge Alsup’s order effectively overrides, at least temporarily, the right of the current duly elected president of the United States to use his constitutional executive powers, through the issuance of an executive order, to rescind an executive order of the previous president. Judge Alsup has decided that the interests of immigrants in the country illegally and of the University of California outweigh any other considerations. Protecting the national security of the citizens of the United States and concerns over whether Obama had overstepped the constitutional bounds of his executive authority by ordering DACA’s implementation in the first place play second fiddle in Judge Alsup’s mind to the welfare of illegal immigrants and of the university at which they are students or staff. Notably, one of the plaintiffs in this case – Janet Napolitano, serving in her capacity as chancellor of the University of California – is using California taxpayers’ money to defend the constitutionally shaky DACA which she helped to create as Secretary of Homeland Security in 2012.
Judge Alsup bizarrely complained that “the new administration didn’t terminate DACA on policy grounds. It terminated DACA over a point of law, a pithy conclusion that the agency had exceeded its statutory and constitutional authority.” Because that conclusion of law might turn out to be wrong, Judge Alsup concluded, the Trump administration’s decision to terminate DACA on those grounds is somehow defective. read more
California really needs to become its own independent Republic again, so they can allow as many freeloaders and terrorists in as they desire and it will have little impact on the actual United States once the President extends the border wall along the western sides of Arizona and Nevada.
So the judge declared that by following the law the President may have broken the law and that only the judiciary has the power to figure out what the law really is and what the president can do to obey the law, that he was following in the first place. Got it.
Used to be that we worried about activist judges legislating from the bench. Now they issue their own Executive Orders, too? Trump should just ignore this robed clown fart.
Dr. Tar — Yeah, that’s about the size of it.
Oh, it needs to be said. Because it’s happened before. And the need for The President to take a knee before a judge of The Ninth Circuit, in this area, has been discussed, in detail. Teenage girls who want to keep their “fierce cred” are known to leave early, just when the party’s getting “good,” because Daddy will yell at them, if they don’t bail, now. Even when Daddy is miles, and miles, away. So, yes, it very much needs to be said, Tweeted, and shrieked, how much Donald Trump was not happy with this.
Getting to be a lot of Trump haters around here all of a sudden.
So, an EO from a liberal president supersedes an EO from a more conservative president, Hell, there’s nothing bias about that. /s
Arrest, disbar, seize all worldly goods through civil forfeiture, charge with sedition. Rinse repeat, -when you deal with a savage amoral enemies you must prepare to be as savage and amoral. The upside is that virtually all of American will support a pushback against our lawless judiciary.
Memo to The DOJ: geld the 9th circuit. Soon.
It not only needs to be said that Trump isn’t happy with this, the American people need to say that they are unhappy with this, and when the Supreme Court bitch-slaps this judge for judicial overreach, impeachment/removal proceedings need to be explored.
TO Dr T
From the link:
“In a glaring example of utter sophistry, Judge Alsup dismissed the importance of the fact that President Trump indicated his desire for DACA to be addressed properly by Congress as part of an overall legislative reform of the nation’s immigration system. Using circular reasoning, Judge Alsop concluded that President Trump had no right to end Obama’s executive order on the basis of his legal concerns and his desire to refer the whole DACA issue to where he believed it legally belonged – Congress.”
Pass a federal law, if your are a federal judge who has 10% of your rulings are overturned then you are off the bench.
Anon: WTF are you talking about?
Cliche, too bad that law’s not already on the books. The last unqualified person to become president put one woman on the SUPREME court despite having an overturn rate of 70%.
How does a judge over rule a sitting president
The President has actual duly mandated constitutional powers and authority while the judge who is a creation of the legislature only has whatever powers were bestowed on him by congressional fiat! His only constitutional effect is that Congress could establish inferior courts! The judge does not have the constitutional authority to rule on the constitutionality of presidential powers and authority granted to him by the constitution and upheld by we the people!
The Republican controlled house should spend their time IMPEACHING ACTIVIST JUDGES instead of trying to sneak in laws to support their positions.
The cost of overriding the decisions of these activist judges needs to be charged to them personally. Not to the court for taxpayers to pay.
Dead judge walking.