Activist Judge Ruled Illegal Aliens Don't Have to "Show Papers"

When historians look back at this time in history, they’ll condemn Congress for dereliction of duty.  It’s bad enough that our elected representatives take five week vacations without addressing our national healthcare crisis, which they created, or a looming budget showdown.  No, this body would rather conduct oversight hearings that accomplish nothing and pass continuing resolutions that fund a bloated government.

However, I’m here to say that their real sin is not reining in an out-of-control federal judiciary.  We have judges who’re adjudicating and enforcing policies that are way beyond their jurisdiction.  Congress is the only body that has the authority to pass immigration laws.  It is Congress, who dictates what the federal judiciary can and cannot address as per Article III in the U.S. Constituion.

We have a crisis of epic proportions in this country due to judicial activism.  We have judges actively endangering the lives of citizens and undermining the value of citizenship.  Here is the latest outrage as reported by USA Today:    

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia halts the planned implementation Friday of Senate Bill 4, according to the American-Statesman.

The law allows local law enforcement to ask anyone who is legally detained or arrested for their immigration status during routine interactions such as traffic stops, the Los Angeles Times reported.

Garcia granted the preliminary injunction after five Texas cities, several counties and sheriffs challenged the law's constitutionality.

The judge wrote in his 94-page order that there is "overwhelming evidence" that the law "will erode public trust and make many communities and neighborhoods less safe," the Los Angeles Times reported.

Garcia also wrote that "localities will suffer adverse economic consequences which, in turn, will harm the state of Texas.”

Immigrants' rights groups complained that the measure could force anyone who looks as if they are in the country illegally to "show papers."

Do they not teach American history in law school?  Citizens have been demanding immigrants to “show papers”  before there was a United States.  Here is an excerpt from The Great Wagon Road by Parke Rouse, Jr. that I found interesting:

In the November rains, the two Moravians started southward again.  They found creeks swollen with muddy rainwater.  When they reached the Rappahannock, they crossed in a canoe and stopped at an inn kept by a German emigrant named Christopher Kuefer.  For several days they plodded through Virginia’s highlands in the rain.  Near Orange County Courthouse they were stopped by an English settler who demanded to see their passport.  When Schnell demurred, several farmers conducted him with rifles to a justice of the peace of Orange County.  But the German produced his passport there, and he and Hussey were permitted to proceed.

A federal judge does not have the authority to create law, that is Congress’ responsibility.  It’s also Congress’ responsibility to limit the jurisdiction of these rogue justices and if possible eliminating repeat offenders.  

Source:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/08/30/federal-judge-blocks-texas-tough-sanctuary-cities-law/619168001/

American Citizens Have Been Disenfranchised of Their Birthright

Millions of Americans instinctively realize something is wrong with Washington D.C. and the federal government in general.  We have judges deciding political issues that are way beyond “judicial review” such as gay marriage, immigration and national security.  We have bureaucrats imposing rules and regulations that have the weight of law while Congress sits on the sidelines claiming oversight.

Where are the checks and balances?  Are there no limitations on what these unelected judges can do?  Why do we need Congress if bureaucrats are running the show?  And where in the Constitution does it state that the legislative branch can abrogate their prerogatives to unelected bureaucrats?

I just finished reading Stolen Sovereignty by Daniel Horowitz and it is an eye opener.  I’ve written about the abuses by the federal courts and bureaucracies in this blog.  I’ve also written about Congress's dereliction of duty.  But I didn’t know the extent of their betrayal.  This federal government has systematically disenfranchised the American people of its birthright and they’ve done it by conferring power upon the unelected branches of government.

What I didn’t realize is that Congress has plenary powers over the federal judiciary.  They can decide the extent of its appellate jurisdiction as dictated in Article III Section 2.  They can tell the courts they no longer decide issues pertaining to immigration and naturalization, gay marriage, or even abortion for that matter.  The courts can only decide cases where they have original jurisdiction as defined in Article III.

This book also details how illegal immigration has disenfranchised American citizens of their birthright and the damage they’ve done to our electoral process.  You’ll be extremely pissed when you discover the lie that illegal aliens have due process rights and that the courts ignored 90 years of precedent.

What I got out of this book is the extent Congress has abrogated their constitutional responsibilities.  But that shouldn’t be a surprise when we have representatives like Nancy Pelosi.  I’ll never forget when she declared she’s not a constitutional scholar when pressed upon an issue.  Well, if you’re not well versed upon the Constitution, then what in the hell are you doing in Washington D.C.?

 

Source:

https://www.amazon.com/Stolen-Sovereignty-Unelected-Transforming-America/dp/1944229299

Illegal Aliens Sue U.S. Over Detention

How do you say “Chutzpah” in Spanish?  Because that’s what it takes to invade a country and demand its citizens provide food, clothing, shelter and medical treatment while decrying detainment violates their human rights and has created psychological problems.  So-called asylum seekers demand asylum from the United States Border Patrol. 

Five illegal alien mothers are seeking millions of dollars from American taxpayers because we won’t allow them to have unfettered access to our country and without a doubt our welfare system.

Many of these illegals have never experienced the wonders of indoor plumbing before coming to the United States.  They had to be taught how to flush a toilet.  But some sewers are universal like corrupt lawyers taking advantage of the system.

We as a people have become a caricature of our former selves.  The United States has become a weak and effete nation.  In the past, we would have imprinted a “made in the U.S.A.” footprint on their teat squawking backsides after handing them a roll of toilet paper and a shovel.  These “asylum seekers” can contemplate their psychological problems while squatting over a hole.

Source:

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2015/08/11/immigrants-mothers-sue-us-government-over-treatment-at-detention-centers/

King Obama Ignores Federal Judge's Amnesty Injunction

Is anyone really surprised when the Obama administration flouts the law?  Recently, a federal judge issued an injunction on an amnesty program that goes beyond the parameters of the law.  Of course, this means nothing to our lords and masters in Washington D.C.  The Washington Examiner reported the following:

The Justice Department lawyers said Homeland Security, which is the defendant in the case, told them Wednesday that an immigration agency had approved about 2,000 applications for three-year work permits, which was part of Mr. Obama’s new amnesty, even after Judge Hanen issued his Feb. 16 injunction halting the entire program.

Top Obama officials, including Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, had repeatedly assured Congress they had fully halted the program and were complying with the order.

 “The government sincerely regrets these circumstances and is taking immediate steps to remedy these erroneous three-year terms,” the administration lawyers said.

 Sen. Charles E. Grassley, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said it was “remarkable” that the administration kept approving some applications.

“The last time I checked, injunctions are not mere suggestions. They are not optional,” the Iowa Republican said. “This disregard for the court’s action is unacceptable and disturbing, especially after Secretary Johnson’s assurances that his agency would honor the injunction.

What are you going to do about it, Senator Grassley?  You’re going to do nothing.  We know it.  The Obama administration knows it.  Everyone knows it.  That’s why these miscreants have no respect for the Constitution, Congress, the courts, and the American people.

Hell, even British kings and queens have to answer to parliament. 

Source:

: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/8/dhs-broke-judges-order-oks-amnesty-applications/#ixzz3ZeEsnmNN 

Will Liberals Use 14th Amendment to Advance Obamacare?

How is it possible that two federal appellate courts can look at an unambiguous statute in a law and come to different conclusions?  The answer is progressive judges will interpret anything they want, even when the language is concise and declaratory.  That’s what happened in two recent rulings on Obamacare.

The so-called Affordable Healthcare Act is highly dependent on federal subsidies.  Very few can afford health insurance without it.  The language is self-evident.  Only state-run exchanges are eligible for federal subsidies.  There were no ands, ifs or buts in the statute.  But according to liberal judges, we must have some kind of Vulcan mind meld to know the intent of Congress.

We all knew the intent of that Congress. It was to deceive and cajole the American people while shoving this excrement sandwich down our collective throats.  After all, it was House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who declared, “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.”  Yeah, we know what their intent was.

Once again, Obamacare is destined for the Supreme Court.  After the Roberts fiasco, I’m not so sure we can count on a slam dunk.   It’s obvious the Obama administration is violating the law.

Let’s assume the Supreme Court does its duty and rules that only state-run exchanges are eligible for federal subsidies, we know that will not be the end of it.  Liberals never give up.  I am willing to bet another lawsuit will wind its way to a pliable federal court and this time progressives will use their favorite weapon, the old dependable 14^th Amendment.

The argument will be made that citizens are being denied equal protection under the law.  They are paying taxes without reciprocity while the rest of the country is enjoying the fruits of their labor; that without federal subsidies, they are being denied access to healthcare.  We will witness the Sandra Fluke defense.

Doubt me?  Just wait and see.

Source:

 http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/212950-appeals-court-strikes-blow-against-obamacare-subsidies

http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelcannon/2014/01/30/george-f-will-four-words-in-the-aca-could-spell-its-doom/

Federal Judge Forces Business Owner to Provide Infanticides to Employees

Welcome to Obama’s America!  We now live in a country where a federal judge and federal bureaucrats determine what rights we’re allowed to have.  Natural rights no longer exist.  The Constitution is barely a speed bump on the Democratic Party’s road to tyranny.  You doubt me?  Under Obamacare, business owners are being forced to violate their conscience and religious beliefs.  A federal court ruled that the plaintiff:  Hobby Lobby must provide their employees infanticide products and services or pay a $1.3 million fine per day.

Here is an open letter from Hobby Lobby’s CEO David Green received by LifeNews.com:

When my family and I started our company 40 years ago, we were working out of a garage on a $600 bank loan, assembling miniature picture frames. Our first retail store wasn’t much bigger than most people’s living rooms, but we had faith that we would succeed if we lived and worked according to God‘s word. From there, Hobby Lobby has become one of the nation’s largest arts and crafts retailers, with more than 500 locations in 41 states. Our children grew up into fine business leaders, and today we run Hobby Lobby together, as a family.

We’re Christians, and we run our business on Christian principles. I’ve always said that the first two goals of our business are (1) to run our business in harmony with God’s laws, and (2) to focus on people more than money. And that’s what we’ve tried to do. We close early so our employees can see their families at night. We keep our stores closed on Sundays, one of the week’s biggest shopping days, so that our workers and their families can enjoy a day of rest. We believe that it is by God’s grace that Hobby Lobby has endured, and he has blessed us and our employees. We’ve not only added jobs in a weak economy, we’ve raised wages for the past four years in a row. Our full-time employees start at 80% above minimum wage.

But now, our government threatens to change all of that. A new government health care mandate says that our family business MUST provide what I believe are abortion-causing drugs as part of our health insurance. Being Christians, we don’t pay for drugs that might cause abortions, which means that we don’t cover emergency contraception, the morning-after pill or the week-after pill. We believe doing so might end a life after the moment of conception, something that is contrary to our most important beliefs. It goes against the Biblical principles on which we have run this company since day one. If we refuse to comply, we could face $1.3 million PER DAY in government fines.

Our government threatens to fine job creators in a bad economy. Our government threatens to fine a company that’s raised wages four years running. Our government threatens to fine a family for running its business according to its beliefs. It’s not right. I know people will say we ought to follow the rules; that it’s the same for everybody. But that’s not true. The government has exempted thousands of companies from this mandate, for reasons of convenience or cost. But it won’t exempt them for reasons of religious belief.

So, Hobby Lobby – and my family – are forced to make a choice. With great reluctance, we filed a lawsuit today, represented by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, asking a federal court to stop this mandate before it hurts our business. We don’t like to go running into court, but we no longer have a choice. We believe people are more important than the bottom line and that honoring God is more important than turning a profit

My family has lived the American dream. We want to continue growing our company and providing great jobs for thousands of employees, but the government is going to make that much more difficult. The government is forcing us to choose between following our faith and following the law. I say that’s a choice no American – and no American business – should have to make.

Sincerely,

David Green, CEO and Founder of Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc

H/T:  Weasel Zippers

Source:  http://www.lifenews.com/2013/01/04/hobby-lobby-ceo-pens-tragic-letter-about-loss-of-religious-freedom/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/28/hobby-lobby-obamacare_n_2375041.html

Oklahoma Loses 10th Amendment Right in Federal Court Power Grab

Once again we are witness to the transgressions of a federal court. Oklahoma passed a state law that forbade judges from considering international and Sharia law in their decisions. CAIR, a subversive Islamic organization, sued. The end result is another federal government power grab.

The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a ruling released Tuesday, affirmed an order by a district court judge in 2010 that halted the law from taking effect. The ruling also allows a Muslim community leader in Oklahoma City to continue his legal challenge of the law's constitutionality.


The measure, known as State Question 755, was approved with 70 percent of the vote in 2010. The law is an amendment to the state constitution and bars courts from considering the legal precepts of other nations or cultures. "Specifically, the courts shall not consider international law or Sharia law," the law reads.

The appellate court opinion pointed out that proponents of the law admitted to not knowing of a single instance in which an Oklahoma court applied Shariah law or the legal precepts of other countries.

"This serves as a reminder that these anti-Shariah laws are unconstitutional and that if politicians use fear-mongering and bigotry, the courts won't allow it to last for long," said Muneer Awad, the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Oklahoma. Awad sued to block the law, contending that it infringed on his First Amendment rights.

What is unconstitutional is a federal court interfering in state law. The federal government has no claims on the internal business of Oklahoma. Our federalist system, which promotes and celebrates self-governance, is slowly turning into despotic state. And predator organizations like CAIR are benefitting from this power grab.

We as a people once knew the limitations and prerogatives of federal and state governments. Alexis de Tocqueville when traveling the United State in the early 1800’s documented Americans knowledge of the differing roles of each body. He also wrote about the fate of countries who tried to replicate our style of government without understanding it. Here is an excerpt from his Democracy in America:

Once the general theory is well understood, the difficulties of applying it remain; these are countless because the sovereignty of the Union is so entwined in that of the states that it is impossible at first glance to see its limits. Everything in such a government is arbitrary and contrived and it can only suit a nation long accustomed to self-government and where political science reaches right down to the lowest rungs of society. Nothing has made me admire the good sense and practical intelligence of the Americans more than the way they evade the countless difficulties which derive from their federal constitution. I have scarcely ever encountered a single man of the common people in America who did not perceive with surprising ease the obligations entailed in the laws of Congress and those which owe their beginnings to the laws of his own state, nor who could not separate the matters belonging to the general prerogatives of the Union from those regulated by his local legislature and who could not point to where the competence of the federal courts begins and the limitation of the state tribunals ends.


Tocqueville further states what happens to those nations who replicate, but don’t follow the SPIRIT of our Constitution as understood by our founding fathers:

The Constitution of the United States is akin to those fine creations of human endeavor which crown their inventors with renown and wealth but remain sterile in others hands.
Contemporary Mexico has illustrated this very thing.

The Mexicans, aiming for a federal system, took the federal constitution of their neighbors, the Anglo-Americans, as their model and copied it almost exactly. But although they transported the letter of the law, they failed to transfer at the same time the spirit which gave it life. As a result, they became tangled endlessly in the machinery of the double system of government. The sovereignty of the states and Union entered into a collision course as they exceeded the sphere of influence assigned to them by the constitution. Even today Mexico veers constantly from anarchy to military despotism and back again.


Is this our fate? We have federal judges who don’t know the limitatations of their power; worse, we Americans have no understanding of our federalist system. Are we destined to be like Mexico? Are predators like CAIR setting up shadow governments in the United States just like their brethren in Great Britain? Will we become another third-world country like Mexico? According to Tocqueville’s analysis we are well on our way to serfdom.

Source: http://www.bellinghamherald.com/2012/01/10/2344789/oklahomas-islamic-law-amendment.html#storylink=cpy

Sen. Chuck E. Schumer: Super Genius has Brother-in-Law appointed to Federal Bench

Senator Chuck E. Schumer: Super Genius made another political move that smacks of cronyism. He had Barack Obama appoint his brother-in-law to a U.S. District Court judgeship. The two senators from New Jersey deny there were any shenanigans. The New York Post reported the following:

What no one mentioned is that McNulty, 57, was the last-minute choice of Lautenberg, who had been leaning toward other candidates until surprisingly submitting McNulty’s name to the White House.


Lautenberg and his aides have given no public explanation for the decision to go with McNulty even though the latter had never been publicly touted as a contender for the job, which carries life tenure and a $174,000-a-year salary.


“No one knows why he did it,” said one person involved in the nomination process. “Everyone thinks it’s all about 2014 and Frank making sure he has Chuck in his corner.”
The White House declined to comment, as did McNulty.


Lautenberg’s reps denied any political motives and stressed that McNulty, who lives in upscale Short Hills, won the nod on the merits. He is a senior partner at Gibbons PC in Newark.


Aides also insisted that Lautenberg was clueless about McNulty’s relationship to Schumer when he first looked at him in 2009.


“It is complete fiction to suggest that there was any deal or that Kevin McNulty was brought into the process at the last minute,” said Lautenberg spokesman Caley Gray.
People involved in the judicial-nomination process in New Jersey told The Post they believe the surprise nomination was a naked political maneuver by the 87-year-old Lautenberg to stay in Schumer’s good graces. Lautenberg is worried that party elders will try to push him out of his beloved Senate seat because of his advanced age — something that Schumer, one of the party’s top opinion makers and fund-raisers, would be able to stop.


And no one, including Senator Chuck E. Schumer, would deny that the Democratic Party would flounder without his “genius.” Why, just ask him; he’ll tell you.

Source: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/he_schu_in_XaoXJibNNI16jjroHK7aUM#ixzz1hhPerPyT

Trillion Dollar Obamacare Law Ruled Unconstitutional

The Libtards received a huge setback on their cornerstone legislation. A federal appellate court ruled Obamacare unconstitutional:

WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama's signature healthcare law suffered a setback on Friday when an appeals court ruled that it was unconstitutional to require all Americans to buy insurance or face a penalty.

The U.S. Appeals Court for the 11th Circuit, based in Atlanta, ruled 2 to 1 that Congress exceeded its authority by requiring Americans to buy coverage, but it unanimously reversed a lower court decision that threw out the entire law.

The legality of the individual mandate, a cornerstone of the healthcare law, is widely expected to be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. Opponents have argued that without the mandate, which goes into effect in 2014, the entire law falls.

This ruling comes on the heels of an Investor’s.com report of an additional $500 billion in deficit spending. Initially, Obamacare was to cost the American taxpayers only $109 billion in deficit spending over 10 years. And Pelosi’s famous assertion is coming true, we are finding out what is in this bill after they passed it:

The latest cost overrun associated with ObamaCare? A $500 billion "error" associated with insuring the spouses and children of new entitlement recipients. That's $500 billion in additional deficit spending — although it didn't stem from an "error" so much as it was the result of a deliberate miscalculation.

As it attempted to calculate ObamaCare's true fiscal impact, the Congressional Budget Office was explicitly instructed to ignore the cost of covering family members under new eligibility requirements for low-income private sector employees.

"The Congressional Budget Office has never done a cost-estimate of this (because) they were expressly told to do their modeling on single coverage," researcher Richard Burkhauser told the Daily Caller this month.

Documents obtained from the Democratic-controlled Joint Committee on Taxation confirm Burkhauser's account — and demonstrate the lengths to which Obama supporters went in an effort to hide these costs from the taxpayers.

Obviously this isn't the first "oversight" associated with this unconstitutional abomination. In March of 2011, Obama's heath care czarina Kathleen Sebelius was forced to acknowledge under oath that the government double-counted $529 billion in "savings" associated with the implementation of the legislation.

Numerous other errors and omissions have been uncovered within ObamaCare's fuzzy math — including a $52 billion raid of Social Security and a $72 billion repayment obligation for a new "long-term care trust fund."

It looks like the D.C. Swamp Monsters have pulled another fast one. Obamacare is now projected to cost the taxpayers over a trillion dollars. And that is just what we have learned so far.

Source: http://www.cnbc.com/id/44121839

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/581079/201108101852/500-Billion-New-Reasons-To-Invalidate-ObamaCare.htm