Posted on 10/07/2018 1:12:32 AM PDT by kevcol
A left-wing federal judge with a history of ruling against the Trump administration ruled against it again Friday by revoking its right to enforce federal immigration laws in California and demanding it funnel a total $28 million in unpaid grant money to “sanctuary cities” like San Francisco.
The ruling by William Orrick concerned a decision by Attorney General Jeff Sessions last year to revoke funding from so-called “sanctuary cities” unless they began abiding my federal immigration laws.
(Excerpt) Read more at bizpacreview.com ...
Wouldn’t it be fun for this to reach the Kavanaugh Court...
Does he drink Beer?
no he does not... but I DO hear he was hit in the face at a bar, with a small piece of ice....
Screw these Leftwing punks judges . Who do they think they are ? Limit the scope of their jurisdictions and render them without power to rule outside of their jurisdictions. For them to be able to ‘order’ the DOJ ,or to affect the executive decisions of the President is outrageous . F them ! They can take their robes and shove them up their poles.
The correct action would be to ignore the ruling. Send in marshals, P.I.’s, etc to dig up dirt on this tyrannical ahole and then alinsky his ass
Betcha we can fine an old boyfriend from HS who will swear that Orrick got him drunk tried to give him a Hoover.
No, he doesn’t have to remember when, where or who was in the area...just that it scarred (and scared) him for life.
PTSD and all that jazz.
There is an older SC ruling preventing fedgov from retroactively revoking earmarked funds for unrelated reasons. But they can tie future spending to activity. It sort of depends if this $28M was tied to cooperation on immigration enforcement.
This kind of thing could swing both ways - like, a leftist government could revoke money from states that don’t impose a 10-day waiting period on gun purchases or a 10 round magazine limit. So I think if money is promised for activity A, then it should be paid if the terms of activity A is honored and not revoked because of activity B.
Just say no.
These wild lower court judges are going to get their wings clipped
Today insures that
Congress has a duty of checks and balances against the Judicial Branch, and they have a duty to rein in activist federal judges.
If a judge is reversed by the Supreme Court more than once, for example, that judge should be impeached.
“by revoking its right to enforce federal immigration laws”
Got that?
A guy who serves as a Federal judge says the Federal Union has no power over the State of California.
By what right does he serve?
Wow, with super judges like these why do we need a Congress or even a President? /sarc off
We're REALLY gettin' good.
What enforcement ability does this judge have?
Where does this ahole get the authority to do this?
Instead, we get the Wide Latina on SCOTUS, who was reversed some 60 times while she was on lower courts
Ig ....nore
A face not even a mother could love, sorry Charlie its time to make the donuts, you lose!
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.