Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Showing posts with label Customs and border patrol. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Customs and border patrol. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 23, 2014

Arpaio Suit Moving Ahead. Will It Stop The Illegal Presidential Actions? We Hope The Entire Judicial System Has Not Been Corrupted.



  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
holder-obama630
A federal judge in Washington listened to arguments Monday in a case that could stop President Obama’s amnesty plan cold, but a decision isn’t expected for days, possibly even several weeks.
U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell heard a request from attorney Larry Klayman of FreedomWatch on behalf of his client, Maricopa County, Arizona, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, to immediately stop the implementation of the executive action Obama announced Nov. 20, which effectively grants amnesty to an estimated 5 million illegal aliens.
Klayman said he was pleased the judge held an expedited preliminary injunction hearing.
“This was important because as we speak, millions of illegal aliens are in the process of being granted amnesty,” he said. “As presented to the court, a large number of these illegal aliens will be back onto the streets of Maricopa County and the nation as a whole. Many of these illegals are repeat criminal offenders. This puts a great strain on the resources of Sheriff Arpaio’s office and endangers the people of Maricopa County.”
Klayman said, win or lose, the case likely will go to the Supreme Court, which “will be the final arbiter of whether the president’s actions are constitutional or not.”
Earlier, Klayman argued Obama “cannot end-run Congress based on his own ‘emperor-like’ actions.”
“By his own admission 22 times in the past, Obama lacks the power to take this unconstitutional executive action,” Klayman said. “To allow this to stand would amount to trashing our constitutional republic and set a bad precedent for future presidents. I am hopeful that the court will grant us the preliminary injunction, in order that the status quo of our current law can remain in effect, and allow the next Congress the right to enact any new legislation that can help solve our border and illegal immigration problems.”
He explained that if Obama’s “unconstitutional executive action” goes forward, Arpaio’s law enforcement duties and responsibilities “will be irreparably harmed.”
The sheriff, before the hearing, said,  the president’s “unconstitutional act” will have “a serious detrimental impact on my carrying out the duties and responsibilities for which I am encharged as sheriff.”
“Specifically, it will severely strain our resources, both in manpower and financially, necessary to protect the citizens I was elected to serve,” he said.
WND reported earlier when another federal judge declared the amnesty unconstitutional.
And Klayman said an injunction preventing the program from being implemented “will work no harm to defendants, as the status quo of existing law enacted by Congress will be preserved. It is not right or just that the president and the other defendants circumvent the will of the people in our republic, simply because they believe that the new Congress will not [toe] the line to their goals for immigration reform.”
Howell already has made a ruling in Arpaio’s favor, ordering a fast track for case arguments and hearings.
Two Justice Department lawyers representing Obama in the case had asked for the deadline for their initial response to be delayed until late January. But the judge ordered it submitted immediately and then scheduled Monday’s hearing.
WND reported Arpaio’s complaint argues the timing is crucial, because the government already is pouring resources into meeting the orders, and the offer of amnesty likely will draw a whole new flood of illegal aliens.
See Klayman’s comments after hearing:
The president’s decision, Klayman wrote, “orders direct DHS personnel including the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and ICE to immediately suspend enforcement of immigration laws with regard to any who appear to be eligible for the new deferred action programs, even though such persons might not yet be able to apply for formal recognition.”
The instructions also tell law enforcement officials to “immediately” begin identifying those who could be given the special benefit.
Klayman said the federal government already has leased office space and begun the process of hiring 1,000 new workers to process the illegal aliens through Obama’s amnesty program.
All of those actions would be for nothing if a court rules that the program doesn’t meet the Constitution’s requirements, he wrote.
“By contrast if the implementation is simply delayed until a court decision, there will be no such harm,” he said.
Klayman explained that under current law, Arpaio will turn over to the DHS illegal aliens who commit crimes in his county to be deported.
“By contrast, under the defendants’ new executive actions, those persons will not be subject to deportation. Therefore, they will serve out their criminal sentences in Plaintiff Arpaio’s jails, costing his office enormous time and expense,” Klayman argued.
The ruling that the amnesty program is unconstitutional came last week from a federal judge in Pennsylvania.
“President Obama’s unilateral legislative action violates the separation of powers provided for in the United States Constitution as well as the Take Care Clause, and therefore, is unconstitutional,” said U.S. District Judge Arthur J. Schwab.
The judge noted Obama “contended that although legislation is the most appropriate course of action to solve the immigration debate, his executive action was necessary because of Congress’s failure to pass legislation, acceptable to him, in this regard.
“This proposition is arbitrary and does not negate the requirement that the November 20, 2014, executive action be lawfully within the president’s executive authority,” the judge wrote. “It is not.”
Quoting from a previous precedent, the judge said that in the “framework of our Constitution, the president’s power to see that the laws are faithfully executed refutes the idea that he is to be a lawmaker.”
“The Constitution limits his functions in the lawmaking process to the recommending of laws he thinks wise and the vetoing of laws he thinks bad,” Schwab said.
The judge said Obama’s contention that Congress had not worked in his time frame was largely irrelevant.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/12/judge-hears-plan-to-stop-obama-amnesty-cold/#KqOPkoZT7cIRujJy.99

Tuesday, May 13, 2014

Hamas, Muslim Brotherhood Are Allowed Into This Country. Why Is Justice Department Involved In A Customs And Immigration Issue?

Why Would The Obama Administration Knowingly Let Terrorists In The U.S.?

May 13, 2014 by  
 97 26
 
 4 241
Why Would The Obama Administration Knowingly Let Terrorists In The U.S.?
THINKSTOCK

The Federal government has stripped Americans of their Constitutionally guaranteed right to privacy via National Security Agency spying, claiming that intrusions are necessary to keep the country safe. But while the NSA stays busy collecting massive amounts of communication data, the Department of Homeland Security may have been busy making sure that individuals on the Barack Obama Administration’s terrorist “hands off” list have no troubles getting into the country.
Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), a ranking Judiciary member, obtained a series of DHS emails that reveal the government has permitted individuals with direct ties to terrorist organizations such as Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah and others to enter the U.S.
One email even suggests that an individual with terror ties who knew he was on the list sued the Customs and Border Protection agency twice because “he’s one of the several hands off passengers nationwide.”
In a February letter to DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson, Grassley wrote: “I’m puzzled how someone could be a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial, be an associate of [redacted], say that the US is staging car bombings in Iraq and that [it] is ok for men to beat their wives, question who was behind the 9/11 attacks, and be afforded the luxury of a visitor visa and de-watchlisted. It doesn’t appear that we’ll be successful with denying him entry tomorrow but maybe we could re-evaluate the matter in the future since the decision to de-watchlist him was made 17 months ago.”
Grassley is still awaiting answers from DHS officials. But in an April response the Senator received from CBP Commissioner Gil Kerlikowsk, Grassley was told that the list is a Justice Department matter.
“CBP does not have any list or other mechanism which would render an individual free of the grounds of inadmissibility or from any other inspection requirements, including secondary inspections,” Kerlikowske wrote.
The CBP official added, “The Terrorist Watchlist is maintained by the Terrorist Screening Center, which was created by the Attorney General and is administered by the Federal Bureau of Investigations. All questions related to the watchlist should therefore be referred to the Department of Justice for response.” Kerlikowske also offers to provide the Senator with a “more detailed briefing on the particular case cited in your letter, in the appropriate setting.” That means nothing will be put in writing so as to avoid any sort of future incrimination in the event the scandal blows wide open.

Friday, May 10, 2013

Give More Power To DHS--Bad Plan

Can you imagine giving un-elected appointed cabinet members power to pardon crimes, waive convictions, and  unlimited discretion in all matters regarding immigration? Would that be a good idea?  In our opinion, it is foolhardy.

How many illegal immigrants would be given passes on any act they were a participant so long as they agreed to be "good boys".  Since when do we give cabinet authorities the power to override the courts?

These are a few of the questions we have on the immigration bill. It appears as if this whole bill is unconstitutional in the authority it grants to other parts of the government and the actions of  those departments are not review able.

Bad legislation. It needs to be thrown out.

Conservative Tom


Immigration Bill Expands Authority Of DHS Empire, Allows Big Sis To Overrule Enforcement

May 10, 2013 by  
Immigration Bill Expands Authority Of DHS Empire, Allows Big Sis To Overrule Enforcement
UPI FILE
The immigration reform bill would give Janet Napolitano more authority.
If the immigration reform bill before the Senate passes, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano will gain the power to pre-empt the enforcement efforts of the Nation’s Immigration and Customs officers on a case-by-case basis.
In a letter submitted to Congress Thursday by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Council of the Nation’s largest Federal employees’ union, along with nearly 30 county sheriffs from across the country, the law enforcement community called upon lawmakers to object to language in the bill that would give DHS appointees far-reaching discretionary powers that would undermine the efforts of on-the-ground agents who make arrests in accordance with the law:
Congress can and must take decisive steps to limit the discretion of political appointees and empower ICE and CBP [Customs and Border Protection] to perform their respective missions and enforce the laws enacted by Congress. Rather than limiting the power of those political appointees within DHS, S. 744 [the bill] provides them with nearly unlimited discretion, which will serve only to further cripple the law enforcement missions of these agencies.
…Unfortunately, S. 744 provides no guarantee of increased border security. Instead, it relinquishes Congress’ authority to establish border security measures to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which will then develop its own unilateral border security plan.
… The degree to which this legislation tolerates both past and future criminal activities ensures legalization and a path to citizenship for many criminal aliens and gang members currently residing in the United States.
What kind of “unlimited discretion” would pass from enforcement agents, working under Congress’s authority, to Big Sis?
  • The power to waive misdemeanor criminal convictions (which, in some States, can include assault, DUI and vehicular homicide) for purposes of determining an illegal’s “Registered Provisional Immigrant” status.
  • The discretion to open legal eligibility to illegals who have committed document fraud and evaded court-ordered removal hearings.
  • Giving the DHS Secretary discretion to pardon any crime that would make an applicant ineligible, if that applicant can claim family unity, a humanitarian need or any other mitigating factor that the Secretary, according to her own definition, “believes is in the public interest.”
  • Granting the DHS Secretary “sole and unreviewable discretion” to deem eligible any illegal who previously has been deported — even though the bill states that deportees aren’t otherwise eligible even to apply for legal status.
After fighting over the significance of Republicans’ demands to put border security ahead of any policy reform, the Senate Judiciary Committee rejected a GOP-led effort Thursday that would have included language intended to slow the path to legal residence for those immigrants already living in the U.S. illegally.