District Court Judge Rules Executive Amnesty Unconstitutional

A Federal District Court judge has ruled Obama's "Amnesty" Memos partly unconstitutional !!

Something like going beyond prosecutorial discretion and more like legislating !!

Hmmm.

What will the Justice Department do now?

District Court Judge Rules Executive Amnesty Unconstitutional

A federal district court judge in Pennsylvania ruled Tuesday that portions of President Obama’s executive amnesty are unconstitutional, according to the Washington Post

Western Pennsylvania District Judge Arthur Schwab concluded in his opinion that Obama’s executive actions go “beyond prosecutorial discretion” and into the realm of legislating.

“President Obama’s unilateral legislative action violates the separation of powers provided for int he United States Constitution as well as the Take Care Clause, and therefore, is unconstitutional,” Schwab wrote in his opinion.

Court Doc

Boynginging.

originally posted by: xuenchen
A Federal District Court judge has ruled Obama's "Amnesty" Memos partly unconstitutional !!

Something like going beyond prosecutorial discretion and more like legislating !!

Hmmm.

What will the Justice Department do now?

District Court Judge Rules Executive Amnesty Unconstitutional

A federal district court judge in Pennsylvania ruled Tuesday that portions of President Obama’s executive amnesty are unconstitutional, according to the Washington Post

Western Pennsylvania District Judge Arthur Schwab concluded in his opinion that Obama’s executive actions go “beyond prosecutorial discretion” and into the realm of legislating.

“President Obama’s unilateral legislative action violates the separation of powers provided for int he United States Constitution as well as the Take Care Clause, and therefore, is unconstitutional,” Schwab wrote in his opinion.

Court Doc

Boynginging.

Of course it is.

But, it would be racist to point out that it is illegal.

The Emperor should make an example of this impudent judge and toss him in prison.

originally posted by: butcherguy
The Emperor should make an example of this impudent judge and toss him in prison.

Na he should of acted just like King Abe and had the judge arrested and then deported.

originally posted by: guitarplayer

originally posted by: butcherguy
The Emperor should make an example of this impudent judge and toss him in prison.

Na he should of acted just like King Abe and had the judge arrested and then deported.

The Judge would be the only one getting deported...

I live by the Border. We are being overrun. The word must be out.

Oh Sorry, pointing that out could be construed as Racism.

And, if you construed it that way...You ARE the Problem...Wake Up !!!

I hate to burst the bubble, because I'd love for this to be true... BUT...

It wasn't a ruling on Obama's policy being unconstitutional.

It was in regard to a different case completely. The reason it came up was because it was a case in which the defendant was an illegal alien that had come back into the country. It was posited that Obama's new executive order might be considered, but the judge opined about the policy being unconstitutional. It was not a decision based on a case being heard on the validity of the executive action, unfortunately.

Just keeping things real folks. From the official court document:

The Court, in this Memorandum Opinion, addresses the applicability of this Executive Action to Elionardo Juarez-Escobar, an undocumented immigrant, who has pled guilty to re-entry of a removed alien in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, and who is awaiting sentencing.

~Namaste

a reply to: SonOfTheLawOfOne

It may however have merit.

Page one of the court doc cites the recent Obama Memos.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: SonOfTheLawOfOne

It may however have merit.

Page one of the court doc cites the recent Obama Memos.

The opinion definitely sets the stage to influence other decisions and rulings when they do come before the Courts, possibly helping to set some precedents later down the road.

However, an opinion in its own right holds no legal standing against the Executive until it's heard by a Federal court or SCOTUS.

Still.... every bit helps.

~Namaste

a reply to: SonOfTheLawOfOne

It set a precedence that went against the intent of Obama's action.

A law enforcement equivalent would be an officer taking an action that becomes the focus of the court during the trial that results in the court telling the officer you cant do that. The higher up the legal system it goes the more agencies it will apply to.

All it takes is 1 ruling in the judicial system to change / invalidate a law.

originally posted by: whyamIhere

originally posted by: guitarplayer

originally posted by: butcherguy
The Emperor should make an example of this impudent judge and toss him in prison.

Na he should of acted just like King Abe and had the judge arrested and then deported.

The Judge would be the only one getting deported...

I live by the Border. We are being overrun. The word must be out.

Oh Sorry, pointing that out could be construed as Racism.

And, if you construed it that way...You ARE the Problem...Wake Up !!!

My use of Abe deporting was a historical fact that in the early 1860's opposition to King Abe by judges newspaper publishers and members of congress. Were either ran out of business (news papers) deported (members of congress) and some imprisoned for various infractions that King Abe deemed non productive to the rape of the south.

if someone thinks that granting 'amnesty' to over 5 million+ ILLEGAL immigrants is within the limits of the presidents power?

THEY ARE WRONG!!!!

That is a MASSIVE ABUSE OF POWER.

originally posted by: neo96
if someone thinks that granting 'amnesty' to over 5 million+ ILLEGAL immigrants is within the limits of the presidents power?

THEY ARE WRONG!!!!

That is a MASSIVE ABUSE OF POWER.

There is not a single Representitive that has the balls to stand up to him.

Look at the new Senators sent to DC to stop Obama in his tracks.

They gave him everything he wanted. They are too big of cowards to stand up to him.

And, they know any criticism will draw the race card from the bottom of the deck.

This is the the way I see it. Now that the POTUS and the democrat party have pushed long and hard for amnesty to garner more votes. Now that it's here the republican party are playing thier ace in the hole Jeb Bush. IMHO Jeb can bring more of the Hispanic / Latino vote than Clinton can due to his wife and the fact that he was a English teacher in Leon. The democrat party made a power move and now the republican party is doing the same. The 2008/2012 elections were fought over the black / minority vote this will be fought over the Hispanic / Latino / minority vote.

So we may see more back peddling from our current administration through smaller channels like this one. To add I think this is why the rublican party stood back and let amnesty go through selling the rope to the democrat party to hang themselves.

This is just my opinion because at the end of the day it's SSDD.

originally posted by: guitarplayer

originally posted by: butcherguy
The Emperor should make an example of this impudent judge and toss him in prison.

Na he should of acted just like King Abe and had the judge arrested and then deported.

Lincoln was the original 'big government' President. He set the standard for screwing us and he goes down in history as a super duper man of the people.

Post something about him being against the integration of blacks into society and you will have a slew of apologists claiming that you are totally wrong.

a reply to: xuenchen

Sorry. Political Correctness always trumps The Constitution. If you're having trouble deciding if something is unconstitutional, simply ask yourself "who will this benefit and where did the idea come from?". If your answer to either is "non-whites", it's not unconstitutional and you're a racist for asking.

a reply to: SonOfTheLawOfOne

However the judge seems to have brought the amnesty being unconstitutional as part of his precedent for a ruling against the illegal.
Even Roe v Wade was just one case of a woman that got abortion ruled as constitutional across the board.

a reply to: whyamIhere

The new Senators haven't even been sworn in yet. The amnesty was calculated by an incredibly manipulative group of people to take place before a new crop of lawmakers came in. But Boehner showed his true colors on the budget deal. Still before the new Senators sworn in.

a reply to: xuenchen

Another Link

The Judge did not allow the defendant to use the order as any part of a defense or influence of outcome, plea ect. But did produce a 30+ page comment and did say it was unconstitutional. In effect he did act against the EO.


However there are 24 states involved in current action against the EO.

originally posted by: SonOfTheLawOfOne

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: SonOfTheLawOfOne

It may however have merit.

Page one of the court doc cites the recent Obama Memos.

The opinion definitely sets the stage to influence other decisions and rulings when they do come before the Courts, possibly helping to set some precedents later down the road.

However, an opinion in its own right holds no legal standing against the Executive until it's heard by a Federal court or SCOTUS.

Still.... every bit helps.

~Namaste

This was a federal judge that offered his opinion and final ruling on a case that could have a huge impact on the Executive's amnesty program. IF the Justice dept. appeals the decision to the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, and this case is upheld, the only recourse for Justice dept. is appeal to the Supreme Court. The judge in his order, has set the defendant up. The defendant must do one of 3 things, each of which will allow the judge to rule specifically on the constitutionality of the executive actions. His current conclusion's in this case, lay the groundwork for either the Justice dept., or the defendant to appeal to a Circuit court, or return to the same court and comply with the judge's orders. Either way, this judge has already stated the actions of the President are unconstitutional, so the outcome is inevitable.

I am looking forward to the outcome of this case, and the one brought by the states.