Posted on 08/14/2015 9:36:30 AM PDT by jazusamo
Judge says amnesty ‘arguably crosses the line’
Sheriff Joe Arpaio can’t sue the Obama administration to stop the president’s deportation amnesty, a federal appeals court ruled Friday in a decision saying it was too tenuous to try to argue that the amnesty will entice other illegal immigrants to try to make the crossing.
The ruling marks a legal victory for Homeland Security — albeit a narrow one, because the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia didn’t reach the actual substance of the president’s tentative amnesty program, instead saying the Maricopa County, Ariz., sheriff didn’t prove he was harmed by the amnesty.
Sheriff Arpaio has argued that the newest amnesty, which Mr. Obama announced in November, would entice many more illegal immigrants to come to the U.S., adding to his workload as sheriff in a massive county near the border.
But the three-judge panel rejected that as “unduly speculative.”
“For the harms Sheriff Arpaio alleges to occur and be redressable by the injunction he seeks, aliens abroad would have to learn about the deferred action policies, mistakenly think that they were eligible to benefit from them, or harbor a hope of becoming eligible for future, similar policies as yet unannounced, actually leave their homes and enter the United States illegally based on that false assumption, commit crime in Maricopa County, become involved in — and costly to — the criminal justice system there, and be less likely under deferred action to be removed from the United States than they would have been without those policies in place,” Judge Nina Pillard said in the majority opinion.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
“Tenuous”!? It’s garon-dang-teed certainty.
WHO appointed these judges?
What is their background?
It’s unfortunate that Arpaio is so old.
He’d be the perfect VP for Trump.
Maybe Homeland Security guy?
Would love to see him as Homeland Security Secretary, libs would go ballistic.
Cornelia Thayer Livingston “Nina” Pillard born March 4, 1961) is a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
She is widely viewed as a leading candidate to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court.
Before becoming a judge, Pillard was a tenured law professor at Georgetown University.
Pillard’s nomination to the D.C. Circuit, along with the nominations of Robert L. Wilkins and Patricia Ann Millett, ultimately became central to the debate over the use of the filibuster in the United States Senate, leading to the controversial use of the nuclear option to bring it to the floor for a vote. She was narrowly confirmed by a vote of 51-44, with her detractors labeling her as one of the most liberal nominees to the federal bench in decades.[1]
On June 4, 2013, Obama nominated Pillard to serve as a United States Circuit Judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, to the seat vacated by Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg, who took senior status on October 14, 2011.[18] On September 19, 2013, her nomination was reported to the floor by the Senate Judiciary Committee by a vote of 10 ayes to 8 nays, the vote falling along party lines.[19]
On November 7, 2013, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid moved to invoke cloture on Pillard’s nomination, in an attempt to cut off a filibuster from Republican senators.[20] On November 12, 2013, the Senate rejected the motion to invoke cloture by a vote of 56-41, with 1 senator voting “present”.[21] Conservatives attacked her references to maternity as “conscription”,[22] among other statements, in objecting to her confirmation.[23][24][25]
After the Senate moved forward in November 2013 with a rules change eliminating the filibuster on federal appeals court nominees, the Senate on December 10, 2013 voted 56-42 to invoke cloture on Pillard’s nomination.[26] That paved the way for a final floor vote on Pillard’s nomination. Shortly before 1 a.m. on December 12, 2013, the Senate confirmed Pillard in a 51-44 vote.[27] On December 17, 2013, Pillard received her federal judicial commission.[28]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina_Pillard
Joe is an “energetic” 83.
Was up here in Indiana at a Republican fundraiser a while back.
EVERY single member of the US Senate should be required to do a WEEK LONG ride along with Maricopa County deputies on the night shift.
They need the truth shoved into the pores of their skins.
Judge Pillard is married to David Cole, well known muslim tool.
Cole has been the legal affairs correspondent for [ communist publication ] The Nation since 2000.[3] He is also a commentator on the National Public Radio program All Things Considered,[2] and a contributor to the New York Review of Books.[4]
Cole has received awards from professional bodies and campaigning groups for his civil rights and civil liberties work, including from the [communist] National Lawyers Guild, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, and the American Muslim Council.[2]
In 2013 David Cole also was the first recipient of the ACLU’s Norman Dorsen Presidential Prize for academic contributions to civil liberties.[6][7]
from wikipedia
GUESS
Yep, Pillard is a flaming lib but Janice Rodgers Brown is considered a conservative on the court and she concurred though she said amnesty ‘arguably crosses the line.’
See posts 6 and 11.
You couldn’t be more correct, they’d get a real schooling.
I saw them after I posted. Big surprises, eh ?
LOL
Did anybody think that the pumpkinheads on the Feral Court would “decide” any differently? They work for Obama and his hoard of extremist, leftwing “lawyers”.
Treason from the bench, so easy even a 3 ring circus can make decisions.
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.
