Federal Judge That Blocked Trump “Sanctuary City” Order Exposed

[Cebu_4_2]

Trump can't get anything done...

Federal Judge That Blocked Trump “Sanctuary City” Order Exposed

April 25, 2017 By C.E. Dyer (http://thefederalistpapers.org/author/cdyer) 14 Comments (http://thefederalistpapers.org/us/federal-judge-that-blocked-trump-sanctuary-city-order-exposed#comments)

President Trump’s executive order to defund “sanctuary cities” has now been blocked by a federal judge (http://thefederalistpapers.org/us/breaking-judge-overturns-another-trump-order-this-is-big) who is, once again, evidenced to be a leftist, politicized hack.

The leftist judge. Fox News reported (http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/04/25/trump-sanctuary-city-law-blocked-judge-san-francisco-obama-donor-william-orrick):
Federal Judge William Orrick III, who on Tuesday blocked President Trump’s order to withhold federal funds from sanctuary cities, reportedly bundled hundreds of thousands of dollars for President Barack Obama.

The same judge issued a restraining order in 2015 against the advocacy group responsible for undercover videos purporting to show Planned Parenthood employees plotting to sell baby organs.

At the time, The Federalist found (http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/31/obama-appointee-blocks-more-video-releases-by-group-behind-planned-parenthood-sting/) that Orrick raised at least $200,000 for Obama and donated more than $30,000 (http://www.citizen.org/whitehouseforsale/bundler.cfm?Bundler=25478) to groups supporting him.
Orrick, 63, also raised money for the failed presidential bid of then-Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) in 2004.



What he did. The Obama appointee from the Northern District of California issued an injunction against the order after Santa Clara County and San Francisco sued over potentially losing federal funds should they continue to flout federal law and serve as so-called “sanctuaries” for criminals.

Reuters reported (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-ruling-idUSKBN17R2QO): “The ruling from U.S. District Judge William Orrick III in San Francisco said Trump’s Jan. 25 order targeted broad categories of federal funding for sanctuary governments and that plaintiffs challenging the order were likely to succeed in proving it unconstitutional.”

Orrick’s comments. While the Department of Justice asserted that the suits assumed too broad an interpretation of the executive order, the judge disagreed in a similar fashion to how the politicized judiciary did in regard to Trump’s travel ban.

“And if there was doubt about the scope of the Order, the President and Attorney General have erased it with their public comments,” Orrick wrote.
Orrick went on to claim that Trump’s order served as a “weapon” to be used against jurisdictions that oppose Trump’s immigration policies — better known as the law — and the judge apparently based his assertions on his interpretation of Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ previous comments.

“Federal funding that bears no meaningful relationship to immigration enforcement cannot be threatened merely because a jurisdiction chooses an immigration enforcement strategy of which the President disapproves,” Orrick wrote.

What this means. It means that we are under the rule of a rogue, hyper left-wing politicized judiciary and conservatives — and any Democrats that actually care about the Constitution, if there are any left — need to step up to rein them in.

[crimethink]

So, why don't Trump or Sessions simply arrest the "judge," or at least ignore his "order"?

[Atocha]

So, why don't Trump or Sessions simply arrest the "judge," or at least ignore his "order"?

Excellent question!

[Horn]

He could try passing a couple more executive orders to block judges from blocking his weak executive orders.

To define More his insanity, at least.

[ximmy]

The White House Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
April 25, 2017

Statement on Sanctuary Cities Ruling

Today, the rule of law suffered another blow, as an unelected judge unilaterally rewrote immigration policy for our Nation. Federal law explicitly states that “a Federal, State or Local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual.” 8 U.S.C. 1373(a). That means, according to Congress, a city that prohibits its officials from providing information to federal immigration authorities -- a sanctuary city -- is violating the law. Sanctuary cities, like San Francisco, block their jails from turning over criminal aliens to Federal authorities for deportation. These cities are engaged in the dangerous and unlawful nullification of Federal law in an attempt to erase our borders.
Once again, a single district judge -- this time in San Francisco -- has ignored Federal immigration law to set a new immigration policy for the entire country. This decision occurred in the same sanctuary city that released the 5-time deported illegal immigrant who gunned down innocent Kate Steinle in her father's arms. San Francisco, and cities like it, are putting the well-being of criminal aliens before the safety of our citizens, and those city officials who authored these policies have the blood of dead Americans on their hands. This San Francisco judge's erroneous ruling is a gift to the criminal gang and cartel element in our country, empowering the worst kind of human trafficking and sex trafficking, and putting thousands of innocent lives at risk.
This case is yet one more example of egregious overreach by a single, unelected district judge. Today’s ruling undermines faith in our legal system and raises serious questions about circuit shopping. But we are confident we will ultimately prevail in the Supreme Court, just as we will prevail in our lawful efforts to impose immigration restrictions necessary to keep terrorists out of the United States.
In the meantime, we will pursue all legal remedies to the sanctuary city threat that imperils our citizens, and continue our efforts to ramp up enforcement to remove the criminal and gang element from our country. Ultimately, this is a fight between sovereignty and open borders, between the rule of law and lawlessness, and between hardworking Americans and those who would undermine their safety and freedom.

[Cebu_4_2]

Trump: I'm 'Absolutely' Considering Breaking Up 'Outrageous' 9th Circuit












http://a57.foxnews.com/media2.foxnews.com/BrightCove/694940094001/2017/04/26/780/438/694940094001_5412616003001_5412615669001-vs.jpg

As seen on The First 100 Days (http://insider.foxnews.com/show/first-100-days)

President Trump told the Washington Examiner (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/exclusive-interview-trump-absolutely-looking-at-breaking-up-9th-circuit-court-of-appeals/article/2621379) that he is "absolutely" thinking about breaking up the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Trump criticized the heavily liberal court that blocked his executive order calling for a Mideast travel ban.
He suggested it would likely uphold the injunction against his withholding of sanctuary cities' federal funds if the Justice Department appeals that ruling.
Trump said that "many people" would support breaking up the "outrageous" bench, adding that he is "absolutely" considering the possibility.
Keith Ellison: Trump WH 'A Dictatorship' That 'Wants to Control What People Learn' (http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/04/26/keith-ellison-slams-trump-dictator-fake-news-attacks-cnn-neil-gorsuch)
Judge Who Blocked Trump Sanctuary City Order Bundled $200K for Obama (http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/04/25/trump-sanctuary-city-law-blocked-judge-san-francisco-obama-donor-william-orrick)
Trump Admin Unveils Tax Plan: Brackets Cut to 3, Standard Deduction Doubled (http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/04/26/trump-tax-cut-plan-announced-brackets-reduced-standard-deduction-doubled)
He said his political opponents always "run to the Ninth Circuit" in "semi-automatic" fashion because of the bench's likelihood to rule against him.
"We have a big country. We have lots of other locations," Trump said, accusing his opponents of "judge shopping" to the West Coast courts.
Previously, the administration decided to appeal (http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/03/18/alan-dershowitz-if-obama-issued-trump-travel-ban-would-not-been-blocked-upheld-court) a nearly-identical ruling against his travel ban from a Fourth Circuit judge in Prince Georges County, Md, reportedly because that bench is more moderate.
Trump slammed the sanctuary city suit ruling of Judge William Orrick III (http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/04/25/trump-sanctuary-city-law-blocked-judge-san-francisco-obama-donor-william-orrick), who is not an appeals judge on the Ninth Circuit, but whose district is under that circuit's purview if the White House appeals the case.
"Sanctuary cities (http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/04/26/sean-spicer-sanctuary-city-ruling-president-trump-illegal-immigration-legal-battle) have been very dangerous: very, very bad. Our most talented people say sanctuary cities are a disaster," Trump said.
On "The First 100 Days," Professor Jonathan Turley said it is concerning that Trump has a penchant for attacking the judiciary.
However, Turley said Judge William Orrick "jumped the gun" by blocking an order on sanctuary cities that has not yet been finalized.
There are 11 regional circuit courts in the United States, plus a twelfth concentrating solely on the District of Columbia.
Judge Nap: Why Trump's 'Defeat' on Sanctuary Cities Is a Temporary One (http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/04/26/judge-napolitano-president-trump-sanctuary-city-ruling-judge-shopping-claims)
Cain: Americans Will Make Sure 'Squishy Republicans' Pass Trump Tax Plan (http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/04/25/herman-cain-squishy-republicans-voters-tell-pass-donald-trump-tax-reform-plan-mnuchin)
'We Don't Do Deportation Here': CA Dem Battles Tucker on Blocked Trump Order (http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/04/25/tucker-carlson-battles-sanctuary-city-democrat-california-donald-trump-order-blocked)

[Joshua01]

Trump isn't the King of the USA. He can't simply remove a federal judge when he doesn't like how they rule, right or wrong. While I'm sure there are processes in place to so, those processes, like anything else in government, is long, slow and convoluted I'm sure. We have become a very impatient nation, and rightfully so. We're tired being shit on by our leaders and led around in circles
So, why don't Trump or Sessions simply arrest the "judge," or at least ignore his "order"?

[Ares]

so, why don't trump or sessions simply arrest the "judge," or at least ignore his "order"?

exactly!!!!!!!!!!

[Ares]

Trump isn't the King of the USA. He can't simply remove a federal judge when he doesn't like how they rule, right or wrong. While I'm sure there are processes in place to so, those processes, like anything else in government, is long, slow and convoluted I'm sure. We have become a very impatient nation, and rightfully so. We're tired being shit on by our leaders and led around in circles

Sure he can, he can have them arrested for obstruction. He can also bring charges of impeachment against him. Out of ALL branches of government the judicial is the WEAKEST.

[Joshua01]

How would the left react to that? Can you see the potential for things to spin out of control once Trump began using those powers in that fashion? While I certainly agree with you that he can, and in fact should act in that fashion, we need to remember the fucking brainless idiots we're up against. Once he starts going around arresting liberal judges the left will view him as Stalin, they'll go into full retard mode and the civil war will commence (not necessarily a bad thing IMHO but it would get sorta ugly). Trump probably has a few things he'd like to get done before that happens. My opinion, nothing more :)
Sure he can, he can have them arrested for obstruction. He can also bring charges of impeachment against him. Out of ALL branches of government the judicial is the WEAKEST.

[monty]

Sure he can, he can have them arrested for obstruction. He can also bring charges of impeachment against him. Out of ALL branches of government the judicial is the WEAKEST.

The president doesn't have impeachment powers.

The Constitution says Article III Judges are appointed for life while serving during good behavior. Federal District Court judges are administrative law judges. Administrative law judges fall jnto the category "Civil Officers".

To impeach a judge for bad behavior the House of Representatives has te sole authority. The Senate then must convict to complete the process.


Article III federal judges are appointed to life terms while serving "during good Behaviour," as stated in Section 1 of Article III (https://ballotpedia.org/Article_III)of the United States Constitution (https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Constitution). Though it does not expressly state in the Constitution that judges may be impeached and removed from office, they fall under the label of "Civil Officers" in Article II, Section 4.[1] (https://ballotpedia.org/Impeachment_of_federal_judges#cite_note-findlaw-1) That says:

“
The President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.[2] (https://ballotpedia.org/Impeachment_of_federal_judges#cite_note-ArtII-2) [3] (https://ballotpedia.org/Impeachment_of_federal_judges#cite_note-quotedisclaimer-3)
”


https://ballotpedia.org/Impeachment_of_federal_judges

[Ares]

The president doesn't have impeachment powers.

The Constitution says Article III Judges are appointed for life while serving during good behavior. Federal District Court judges are administrative law judges. Administrative law judges fall jnto the category "Civil Officers".

To impeach a judge for bad behavior the House of Representatives has te sole authority. The Senate then must convict to complete the process.

[/SUP][/TD]
”
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
https://ballotpedia.org/Impeachment_of_federal_judges

He can arrest him and charge him for obstruction and judicial overreach. It would be up to the Congress to impeach, you are correct.

[monty]

He can arrest him and charge him for obstruction and judicial overreach. It would be up to the Congress to impeach, you are correct.

Or he can just ignore them, what can they do about it, arrest him or charge him with contempt? I don't think they can touch him during his term in office other than through impeachment

[Twisted Titan]

So, why don't Trump or Sessions simply arrest the "judge," or at least ignore his "order"?

I see this happening before he completes his first term

[Horn]

The president doesn't have impeachment powers.

The problem with Trump is that he is a nigger just like Obama.

[monty]

The problem with Trump is that he is a nigger just like Obama.


He dances to the music of the same band

[crimethink]

Trump isn't the King of the USA. He can't simply remove a federal judge when he doesn't like how they rule, right or wrong. While I'm sure there are processes in place to so, those processes, like anything else in government, is long, slow and convoluted I'm sure. We have become a very impatient nation, and rightfully so. We're tired being shit on by our leaders and led around in circles

North Korea nukes the USA, and a Federal "judge" issues an order requiring Trump not to retaliate, as it would be "a crime against humanity, in violation of international law." What would you suggest be done? Appeal?

Likewise, with the ongoing invasion of America. Does Trump act, as he is constitutionally required "to protect the states from invasion," or, does he let the judicial dictatorship shyster it out for years and years, while the invasion becomes a fait accompli?

My contention is that Trump's talk is just that: talk. No courage to actually take action. This is has been shown over and over now. "They're good people," you know.

[Horn]

There must be some kingpin drug lord sitting in San Fran prison the Mormons are makin dough thru.

Trump n Jew clan r trying to break the monopoly on.

[monty]

This is from 2010, Newtie says impeach judges


http://youtu.be/fBFgXTDTaV0

https://youtu.be/fBFgXTDTaV0

Ernie Moore (https://m.youtube.com/channel/UC5QttHJeYDrFMS-c0yxkB5g) 3,428 views

https://yt3.ggpht.com/-RT7cdFqOzA4/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAAAA/-DC6547Ogj4/s88-c-k-no-mo-rj-c0xffffff/photo.jpg
SUBSCRIBE
19

41 (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fBFgXTDTaV0&feature=youtu.be#)

1 (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fBFgXTDTaV0&feature=youtu.be#)
Uploaded on Jul 14, 2010
I sincerely hope you will think about what Newt says in this video. Here is a fellow who - with all his flaws - is still a great thinker about conservative values in a day when image usually counts for more than substance.

[crimethink]

Congress can impeach and remove these pricks, yes, but, perhaps easier, it can simply cut their power down to size with a simple Act of Congress.

Is the will there to do it?

[monty]

Congress can impeach and remove these pricks, yes, but, perhaps easier, it can simply cut their power down to size with a simple Act of Congress.

Is the will there to do it?

There is no will.
Personally I think Congress is/has been complicit in the charade these so called judges have the power they wield.

[Joshua01]

Precisely! Congress does not represent the people, it manipulates the people for their own gain and power!
There is no will.
Personally I think Congress is/has been complicit in the charade these so called judges have the power they wield.

[crimethink]

There is no will.
Personally I think Congress is/has been complicit in the charade these so called judges have the power they wield.

1987 AD:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8tQAYYtLok

[Horn]

There is no will.
Personally I think Congress is/has been complicit in the charade these so called judges have the power they wield.

Had congress had an original idea that worked well in 3 decades it might be more full on itself.

My gosh if a president could ever inspire it...

[Horn]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eC3k5gyxkpM

[Cebu_4_2]

Sheesh...

[cheka.]

illegals caught gaming e-verify with stolen identities

http://www.texaspolicenews.com/default.aspx/act/newsletter.aspx/category/News+1-2/MenuGroup/Home/NewsLetterID/66966.htm

BEAUMONT, Texas – Fifteen illegal aliens working under false identities have been arrested on charges out of the Eastern District of Texas, announced Acting United States Attorney Brit Featherston today.



On the evening of May 4, 2017, federal and state agents arrested 15 illegal aliens working under false identities at the LNG facility under construction in Cameron, Louisiana. Earlier in the week, a federal grand jury in Beaumont returned indictments charging the individuals with identity theft, using social security numbers of actual citizens, and making false claims of United States citizenship in order to obtain jobs at the facility over the past three years.

The defendants, who are in the United States illegally, were all working under assumed names obtained through the possession of fraudulently obtained legitimate social security numbers and matching birth certificates, primarily issued in Puerto Rico. With such primary identifying information the defendants obtained State issued identification cards from Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, Texas, and other states. The use of such documents allowed the illegal aliens to pass the E-verify systems used by their employers to ascertain U.S. citizenship or alien lawful work permits.

All 15 aliens were identified after being arrested under their assumed names. Some had previous encounters with immigration authorities and had returned to the United States, which can lead to further charges being added or increased sentences upon conviction of the current charges. The defendants had all been hired by subcontractors who used hiring offices in Port Arthur, Texas, to accept applications, interview, and E-verify employees who then report to the jobsite in Louisiana upon hiring. Those arrested and making initial appearances in federal court today are:



Miguel Roblero-Morales, 36, of Guatemala;
Mario Arnulfo Pantaleon-Castaneda, 30, of Guatemala;
Luis Angel Pulido Cervantes, 29, of Mexico;
Joel Pulido-Gutierrez, 27, of Mexico;
Juan Manuel Zavala-Leon, 30, of Mexico;
Rigoberto Romo Martinez, 41, of Mexico;
Jose De Jesus Vega-Gutierrez, 31, of Mexico;
Juan Alexis Juarez-Coto, 46, of Honduras;
Felix Jiminez-Ruiz, 25, of Mexico;
Jose Gutierrez-Valencia, 27, of Mexico;
Bernardo Hernandez-Gallo, 37, of Mexico;
Elizar Alvarez-Barajas, 43, of Mexico;
Roberto Carlos Cruz Cruz, 28 of Mexico;
Guily Tenorio-Sierra, 21, of Mexico; and
Arturo Rebollar-Osorio, 34, of Mexico.



“Protecting critical infrastructure is a national security priority for law enforcement,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Brit Featherston. “To do so we must make sure that workers in our community, and especially those working in proximity to vital national interests like our oil and chemical industries, are legal and properly vetted as required by law. Further, we must remain vigilant to these concerns to protect the economy and the law abiding worker.”



If convicted, the defendants each face up to five years in federal prison. The statutory sentence prescribed by Congress is provided here for information purposes, as the sentencing will be determined by the court based on the advisory sentencing guidelines and other statutory factors. A sentencing hearing will be scheduled after the completion of a presentence investigation by the U.S. Probation Office.



This case is being investigated by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations, ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations, Social Security Administration Office of Inspector General, Coast Guard Investigative Service, and the Texas Department of Public Safety and prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert L. Rawls.



An indictment is not evidence of guilt. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.





Davilyn Walston

Public Information Officer/Law Enforcement Coordinator

U.S. Attorney's Office

Eastern District of Texas

350 Magnolia Suite 150

Beaumont, TX 77701