Posted on 12/17/2014 4:24:54 AM PST by Hostage
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION HEARING TO STOP OBAMA'S AMNESTY EXECUTIVE ACTIONS
Date: December 22, 2014 Place: D.C. Federal Court, 3rd and Constitution Ave., Courtroom 15 Time: 9:30 AM
Here is the press release for the hearing:
http://www.freedomwatchusa.org/dc-federal-court-orders-expedited-preliminary-injunction-hea
Here is the 164 page final injunctive motion:
http://www.freedomwatchusa.org/pdf/141204-FINAL%20Motion%20for%20Preliminary%20Injunction.pdf
Here is the related lawsuit:
http://www.freedomwatchusa.org/pdf/141120-Arpaio%20Complaint%20with%20Exhibits.pdf
The preliminary injunction requested in this case could be granted the same day or in days following the hearing. In other words it is quick. It is like a Temporary Restraining Order.
If the preliminary injunction is granted, then Obama will be unable to carry out Executive Amnesty Actions until he has the injunction removed which may be never.
For those who think Obama will just ignore any injunction, they need to understand that Obama cannot produce documentation (IDs. Drivers Licenses, SSNs, Work Permits, EBT etc.) by himself. Obama needs people to carry out his directives. An injunction will put on notice to any persons that attempt to carry out amnesty actions that they will be violating a federal court order and will be arrested and possibly incarcerated.
This also applies to federal contractors. The federal contractor for the amnesty ID cards is a General Dynamics plant in Corbin, Kentucky. There is no possibility that General Dynamics would even think of violating a federal court order.
In parallel to this Motion for Preliminary Injunction is the 24-state (and growing) Abbott lawsuit that is linked here:
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/files/epress/files/20141203ImmigrationExecutiveOrderLawsuit.pdf
One additional thing to note is that there is an urgency (some would say emergency) from the side that is filing against Obama.
Note: THERE IS NO EMERGENCY OR EVEN URGENCY FROM OBAMA’S SIDE.
What this means is that if a preliminary injunction is granted, there is no compelling reason why Obama should be able to speed up the legal process. In other words, the courts do not need to consider disrupting their scheduled cases in order to allow Obama to butt in.
Further this means that a preliminary injunction could remain in place for a year or more.
If I didn’t say it before, thank you for a MOST INFORMATIVE exchange yesterday!
Now this morning, I saw a mention on a FR thread that Odinga has threatened a Federal judge not to do this?
I will post the link here, when I find it...
One additional piece of information: the enforcement of a preliminary injunction order would be carried out by United States Marshalls assigned to Federal Courts.
Holder’s justice department is not in the loop.
Did Obama actually sign an EO, or was it only a verbal edict?
See the links to the legal filings. It’s all in there. Exhibits show directives and memoranda from Obama’s directors. They are carrying out orders from Obama even though Obama has tried to hide his trail.
I don’t think he’s actually signed an Amnesty related EO. I believe he’s just told DHS, Immigration etc...what he wants done (or more to the point, not done).
Who will be the judge, or judges, to consider this request?
Oh, sorry, I see from the link the judge is a woman appointed by Obama in 2010.
Oh, well. Nice try.
Obama will not obey an injunction. He has no respect for the law. He is a law unto himself. The democrats, RINO’s and the MSM will back him up. The Courts will back down.
Obama is a full fledged dictator. What he says goes. His word is now the Supreme law of the land.
Congress is irrelevant.
The courts are irrelevant.
The people are irrelevant.
Obama über Alles.
He signed an executive “memorandum”. It does not get entered into the federal registry, so there is no official record of his order.
Basically it is the same as an oral dictate.
The fact that the federal government would follow an unofficial and hence unwritten law makes it clear the we are living under a dictator.
Does anyone think Obola will honor any law or injunction?
My experience is that you can never tell by looking at who was appointed by whom and when.
This judge had a history before her appointment and was up for selection. Her appointment by Obama was a mere formality and not agenda driven.
She also overruled Obama’s lawyers who were asking that the hearing be delayed into the new year. She granted Klayman’s request for fast track.
If she follows the law, the preliminary injunction is a done deal. If she listens to Obama’s justice department and their explanation that she has no jurisdiction to hear the motion as it it the President’s sole discretion to decide who and who not to deport, then she may stretch her authority against the evidence that Obama plans to issue IDs, SSNs, Work Permits, EBT and federal benefits to illegals.
We will see.
But there is also a strong lawsuit by Abbott in Texas, joined now by 24 states total and growing. The link to the lawsuit is given above. Abbott filed in the Southern District of Texas.
Hard to imagine someone who was Patrick Leahy’s top legal counsel coming through—but fingers crossed.
You are wrong about federal court enforcement.
Read post #1 4th paragraph on.
And read post #4.
Post #16.
Original announcement
SHERIFF JOE SCORES VICTORY AGAINST OBAMA’S AMNESTY (Expedited Injunction)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3235995/posts
http://www.wnd.com/2014/12/sheriff-joe-scores-victory-against-obamas-amnesty/
Art 3: In all Cases ....in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.
Would some knowledgeable person please explain why this is in a federal court when it isn't just one state but dozens of them involved in this case.
All federal courts are under the Supreme Court. Any federal court can claim jurisdiction as they are arms of the Supreme Court.
The Arpaio lawsuit is a county lawsuit not a state. Nevertheless, the defendants are agencies of the federal government so federal courts have jurisdiction.
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.