Posted on 04/13/2015 2:13:00 PM PDT by Elderberry
Federal district court judge Andrew Hanen slammed the Obama administration with a solid one-two punch late last night. In one order, he refused to lift the preliminary injunction barring implementation of the president’s immigration amnesty plan. In a second order, Hanen said that the “attorneys for the Government misrepresented the facts” about the implementation to the court.
On February 23, the Justice Department filed a “Motion to Stay” the injunction pending an appeal to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Judge Hanen denied that motion, saying not only that his original ruling was correct, but that subsequent events had “reinforced” the correctness of his original decision.
Hanen cited President Barack Obama’s own words as part of this reinforcement. Speaking at a town hall after the injunction order had been issued, the president said that any government official who did not halt the deportation of anyone who qualifies under his new plan would suffer the “consequences.”
Hanen took that remark as evidence of President Obama’s instructing federal law-enforcement officials that our immigration laws “are not to be enforced when those laws conflict” with the president’s plan and that, if Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials failed to follow the president’s plan, “there will be consequences for this failure — just as there would be consequences if they were in the military and disobeyed an order from the Commander in Chief.” Judge Hanen concluded that Obama’s words “confirm that [the government] has abdicated enforcement.”
Hanen’s second order concerned the “Advisory” that Justice filed on March 3, informing the judge that between November 20, when the president announced his new plan, and February 16, when the injunction was issued, DHS had issued three-year deferrals to more than 100,000 illegal aliens. This irked the judge because the attorneys had assured him — both in court and in written pleadings — that no part of the president’s plan would be implemented until late February. In the Advisory, DOJ did not admit that it had misled the court. Rather, it said it was just trying to clear up any “confusion” that might have occurred. Judge Hanen clearly was not convinced.
An infuriated Hanen said: “This Court expects all parties, including the Government of the United States, to act in a forthright manner and not hide behind deceptive representations and half-truths. That is why, whatever the motive for the Government’s actions in this matter, the Court is extremely troubled by the multiple representations made by the Government’s counsel — both in writing and orally — that no action would be taken#…#until February 18, 2015.”
Hanen was also angry that DOJ lawyers delayed telling him about this problem. They told Judge Hanen they were unaware there was a problem until they read his February 16 injunction order. Hanen said that the Justice Department’s claim that it took “prompt” remedial action to inform the court was “belied by the facts,” since they waited two weeks after that to file the “Advisory.”
In fact, Hanen implied that the government may have deliberately delayed telling him about this issue. When DOJ filed its “Motion to Stay” on February 23, the motion made no mention of this problem. Instead, according to Hanen, “mysteriously, what was included” in DOJ’s motion was a request that Judge Hanen issue a decision on the motion within two days. If Hanen had done what the government requested, then the court “would have ruled without the Court or the States knowing that the Government had granted 108,081 applications#…#despite its multiple representations to the contrary.” Yet the DOJ lawyers “stood silent. Even worse, they urged this Court to rule before disclosing that the Government had already issued 108,081 three-year renewals#…#despite their statement to the contrary.”
Hanen cites the same provision of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct that I discussed in my March 17 article here — the provision that requires complete “Candor toward the Tribunal.” Hanen acknowledges that “fabrications, misstatements, half-truths, artful omissions, and the failure to correct misstatements may be acceptable, albeit lamentable, in other aspects of life,” but says that in a court of law, “when an attorney knows that both the Court and the other side are relying on complete frankness, such conduct is unacceptable.” This is one of the most damning criticisms I have ever read about the behavior of Justice Department lawyers.
Judge Hanen considered striking the government’s pleadings. He ultimately decided not to, because that would have ended the case, giving a victory to the 26 states that brought the suit to stop Mr. Obama’s unilateral amnesty program. Because the issues at stake “have national significance and deserve to be fully considered on the merits,” Hanen concluded, “the ends of justice would not be served by striking pleadings in this case.” He warned DOJ, though, that his decision did not leave him “impotent to fashion an appropriate remedy” for the government’s misconduct.
Hanen then ordered DOJ to produce, by April 21, every draft of the “Advisory,” including all “metadata” that would show when each draft was prepared, and who prepared or edited it. He also ordered DOJ to produce the names of everyone who knew about the “Advisory” or the granting of the 100,000 deferrals. In light of Hillary Clinton’s deletion of all of her e-mails, it is also interesting that Hanen ordered that no e-mails, computer records, hard drives, or servers that have any information about this issue be “destroyed or erased.” Judge Hanen obviously wants to find out who knew about the misrepresentations made to the court. He may very well consider further sanctions against whoever was involved in this deception once he gets that information.
The main battle over the president’s immigration plan and the injunction will now be in the Fifth Circuit. But Hanen’s findings against the government, particularly the misconduct of DOJ lawyers, will not help the administration’s case.
Even more twists!
Press release
Law Offices of Orly Taitz
TX Judge, who ruled to stop Obama amnesty, to rule on Motion by Attorney Orly Taitz for sanctions due to Obama’s intentional release from DHS detention of illegal aliens with deadly infectious diseases.
Attorney Orly Taitz filed in July of 2014 her legal action against Barack Obama, Sec of DHS Jeh Johnson and Sec. of HHS Sylvia Burwell seeking an injunction and halt of the transportation by the defendants all over the country of illegal aliens, many of whom are afflicted with infectious diseases, among them deadly drug resistant Tuberculosis.
The judge on this case is Judge Andrew Hanen, who stopped Obama’s amnesty. Judge Hanen already issued an order to show cause to the defense, why shouldn’t he rule in favor of the plaintiff,Orly Taitz.
Judge Hanen conducted two injunction hearings: in August and October of 2014. During those hearings defendants brought 3 attorneys and multiple witnesses who swore that they check all illegal aliens prior to their release into general population and they do not endanger the public.
Today, on April 13, 2015, the court docketed a new motion by Taitz with new information showing that defendants are committing fraud on the court and releasing individuals with drug resistant Tuberculosis into general population.
Taitz v Johnson Notice of new facts and motion for sanctions. Taitz provided Judge Hanen with a letter from US Senators and US representatives as well as a letter from a County director of Health stating that the defendants are releasing from their DHS/INS facilities individuals with deadly drug resistant tuberculosis, which is a reckless disregard to human life.
Taitz argues that this represents fraud on the court for which defendants should be sanctioned. Defendant’s response is due by May 1st. Additionally, Taitz previously provided the court with information showing that defendants not only causing transfer of infectious diseases, but also massive theft of IDs and Social Security numbers that are used by illegal aliens to obtain jobs and benefits to the detriment of the US citizens and taxpayers.
Taitz provided Judge Hanen with 150 pages of evidence, showing that Barack Obama is one of individuals, who is using a stolen CT Social Security number of an individual born in 1890 and presumed to be deceased with no heirs, as well as other bogus ID. Evidence of forgery, fabrication, fraud and identity theft in Obama’s IDs
“Judge Hanen considered striking the government’s pleadings. “
That would have been awesome. It’s like there’s this one little of puddle of reality out there that Obama happened to step in.
Disappointed here: I cannot find “Bush’s Fault”
Obama only got a few yes men in that Circuit.
God bless Judge Hanen!
That would have been awesome. It’s like there’s this one little of puddle of reality out there that Obama happened to step in.
It would have been "awesome" but also case closed against Obama....
Now they get to the issue of sanctions...and who knew what and when....
Much more awesome.
I think we’re the only three thrilled about this! Praise the Lord! And now the case can be heard on it merits, as well!
discovery ......discovery and more discovery.
Make that Four!
I’m sure 0dungo has the NSA working overtime on Judge Hanen’s prior phone calls, emails, scans of all of his postal delivery envelopes.. ALL OF THEM, and they DO HAVE ALL OF THEM.
And some folks might believe we’re just kidding but we’re not. And don’t forget to include the IRS.
Like how many of those new SSN#s have been issued last year and -gasp- filed a tax return with them by the 15th?
Or have had taxes withheld this year?
I’m overjoyed he noted that zero threatened DHS and BP with ‘repercussions’ if they continued to do their job despite his warnings with his executive memo. After the 5th Circuit panel hears this, does it go straight to SCOTUS or does it have to detour to the ninth circuit?
He could have struck the pleading and sanctioned the lawyers.
If I was judge I would have struck the pleading and rule no refiling for 1 year, then fine the lawyers $5000 and 14 days in local jail from 6:00 pm to 6:00 pm.
They cannot refile until they win an appeal, and if they appealed it would at most be remanded back.
That’s my “I slept at holiday inn” opinion.
Judge Smith is as solid as they come. Don’t know enough about Elrod.
Well, if it’s for what Obama “says,” then it’s best to keep “Bush’s fault” off, since he never uses those exact words (even though that’s what he means when he says “the previous administration,” which is the center square).
...............I know it’s hard to believe but there ARE some people out there that live pristine lives. My Aunt never so much as got a parking ticket, drank even one beer, went dancing, said darn much less damn, and on and on.
Indeed, Texas is full of them! Now yours truly isn’t one of them, but there ARE plenty of them out there. Judge Hanen living in Brownsville (or, is it Harlingen) would have to be a pretty straight up guy as there are crooks 3 feet deep down there. It’s a way of life.
..........for those that may not know, when your pleadings are struck you are basically like a ship in mid ocean that lost it’s ONE and only propeller! You may survive sinking but it is not likely.
Hang email high.....there must be serious punishment.....swiftly
How about perjury, and malfeasance in office for starters? Both are impeachable offenses and sufficient to removes ANY elected or appointed federal official, and also disqualify same from ever again holding a position of public trust. I hope this Judge shoves it right up Odingo’s a$$ sideways ... Of course, the cocaine-snorting Muslim-coddling sodomite would likely enjoy the sensation.
“Can we retire that numskull Roberts and put Haven in as Chief Justice?”
I say get rid of Sodomizer and put him in, then let him
make a case to prosecute Roberts or expose how he’s been
compromised and by whom. Sodomizer and Kegger are just
stupid fascists but Roberts is a traitor and needs to be
taken down hard.
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.