Posted on 08/30/2017 6:26:21 PM PDT by jazusamo
AUSTIN, Texas — A federal judge late Wednesday temporarily blocked most of Texas’ tough new “sanctuary cities” law that would have allowed police to inquire about people’s immigration status during routine interactions such as traffic stops.
The law, SB 4, had been cheered by President Donald Trump’s administration but decried by immigrants’ rights groups who say it could force anyone who looks like they might be in the country illegally to “show papers.”
The measure sailed through the Republican-controlled Legislature despite months of protests and opposition from business groups who worried that it could cause a labor-force shortage in industries such as construction. Opponents sued, arguing it violated the U.S. Constitution, and U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia’s ruling in San Antonio keeps it from taking effect as planned Friday – allowing the case time to proceed.
In a 94-page ruling, Garcia wrote that there “is overwhelming evidence by local officials, including local law enforcement, that SB 4 will erode public trust and make many communities and neighborhoods less safe” and that “localities will suffer adverse economic consequences which, in turn, will harm the state of Texas.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Another Bill Clinton appointed judge.
Yea, cause there’s nothing happening in Texas
Time to force judges to keep their noses out of immigration business.
Garcia
This is what happens when there are no firing squads.
Trump needs to stop pretending.
Time for a little Jacksonian rebuttal: Let’s see him enforce it.
“In a 94-page ruling, Garcia wrote that there “is overwhelming evidence by local officials, including local law enforcement, that SB 4 will erode public trust and make many communities and neighborhoods less safe” and that “localities will suffer adverse economic consequences which, in turn, will harm the state of Texas.” “
What BS!
You can’t overturn a law on the grounds that it’ll hurt the economy - ANY TAXATION OF MINIMUM WAGE LAW DOES THAT!!
You can’t overturn a law because it will make neighborhoods “less safe” - because that makes Section 8 housing completely ILLEGAL!
This IS POLITICIZED BS with no foundation in actual LAW or interpretation of such!
Garcia was nominated by President Bill Clinton on November 19, 1993. He was confirmed by the United States Senate on March 10, 1994, and received his commission on March 11, 1994. He became Chief Judge on January 1, 2016.
On February 26, 2014 in San Antonio, Garcia overturned the Texas ban on same-sex marriage, ruling that the prohibition is unconstitutional and stigmatizes the relationship of gay couples.
... SB 4 will erode public trust and make many communities and neighborhoods less safe” and that “localities will suffer adverse economic consequences which, in turn, will harm the state of Texas.”...
= = =
Just the opposite.
The Sanctuary position has eroded public trust, made communities less safe, and harmed the economic state of Texas.
These are not legal arguments. These are "why I don't like this" arguments.
I sincerely hope the Texas AG rushes to SCOTUS to set this right -- and right quick.
If lawyers can be disbarred,
And priests can be defrocked,
Can this judge be “disrobed?”
Better yet...that might not be such a good idea!
And yet states can declare themselves sanctuaries for illegals in violation of Federal law. Imagine that?
This nonsense has been going on for over 60 years....up to the Congress to start mass impeachment of judges, otherwise, it’s all talk.
Judges are impeached.
You can’t overturn a law on the grounds that it’ll hurt the economy - ANY TAXATION OF MINIMUM WAGE LAW DOES THAT!!
...
I think all that only applies to the injunction, under the requirement that it would cause irreparable harm, or something like that.
“...Time for a little Jacksonian rebuttal: Let’s see him enforce it.....”
Yep.....Just keep enforcing the law as it was passed and let the communist POS try to enforce the ruling. Make him “work” for it.
Until now, judges have enjoyed a public perception of being impartial and unbiased. Nonsense, of course, but nevertheless that has been the case. It's why Trump took a beating for mentioning a judge ruling on his Trump U may have a bias against him because he's a member of La Raza.
However the left is overplaying their hand. My wife's lifelong friends are mostly very leftwing democrats. She tells me that even they are saying the press is going overboard with the criticism, that they clearly have an agenda. This is something they always denied before, said they were right up the middle and it only seemed they were biased because the right was so wrong all the time. Now they say "well okay, they aren't trying to be fair anymore". I think the judiciary is going to see the same erosion of trust.
When judges become openly political hacks in the eyes of the public they become vulnerable to calls for their removal. This is now happening I think. Time will tell.
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.