U.S. judge throws out Arizona sheriff's immigration suit against Obama

“Is The Constitution constitutional anymore?”
******************************************************************************************************
Not to the Obama judicial appointees. They almost universally believe that NOBODY has “standing” to challenge anything that Obama decrees.

I don’t know. It seemed pretty straightforward to me. The sheriff does not enforce the immigration laws only the feds do using the deferred action programs that have gone on for years. Thus, the sheriff does not have standing based on past jurisprudence. Don’t get me wrong, I would have liked to see the sheriff win but the decision with cited the jurisprudence contained within the decision seemed to be pretty hard to overcome for the sheriff.

Here is a paragraph in the decision that I thought was interesting:

In contrast, the challenged deferred action programs do not
regulate the official conduct of the plaintiff but merely regulate the conduct of federal immigration officials in the exercise of their official duties. Thus, even if the plaintiff’s official functions could be viewed as a “legally protected interest,” the challenged deferred action programs do not amount to “an invasion” of that interest in a manner that is “concrete and particularized.” Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. at 560. Indeed, it is not apparent exactly what cognizable interest and injury the plaintiff can assert since, as the plaintiff’s Complaint
recognizes, the plaintiff has no legal authority to enforce the immigration laws of the United States.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.