February 14, 2017
The judge looks somehow even more like I expected him to than I expected him to. And I’m not even sure what that means.
During his term, Obama asked congress to give legal status to hundreds of thousands of illegal beaners. His demand was rejected. In spite of that, he illegally implemented his ridiculous scheme by executive action.
Now that his program, DACA, is expiring, Trump intends to just let it dissolve. All he has to do to take away these people’s legal status is: nothing.
Yet subversive activist judges see it fit to somehow “block” him from doing nothing. I don’t even know how that works.
A second federal judge Tuesday has temporarily blocked the Trump administration from ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.
The program is ending all by itself. The employment authorization documents it gave illegal immigrants had a 3-year expiry date, and most if not all of them are no longer valid.
Time’s up, Carlos.
Are the judges going to force Trump to issue more authorizations?
Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis of the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York ruled that DACA participants and states are likely to succeed in their challenge that the way President Donald Trump terminated the Obama-era program was arbitrary and capricious.
Trump last year announced his plan to end DACA, the policy that allowed undocumented immigrants brought to the US as children to stay in the country, effective March 5. That deadline has become central in the congressional debate over immigration, but Democrats and Republicans are nowhere near a breakthrough.
The March 5 deadline is just a formality; the program would be officially defunct. But even if DACA stays on the books for a while longer, it won’t have any effect as long as more IDs aren’t granted.
Tuesday’s ruling, combined with a ruling from a California judge last month, means the program could end up going beyond the March 5 date.
“Defendants indisputably can end the DACA program,” Garaufis wrote, referring to the Trump administration. “The question before the court is thus not whether defendants could end the DACA program, but whether they offered legally adequate reasons for doing so. Based on its review of the record before it, the court concludes that defendants have not done so.”
The judge said that the decision to end the program was based in part on the “plainly incorrect factual premise” that the program was illegal.
In other words, the judge is saying that Trump absolutely has the right to end DACA, but only if judges approve of his reasoning for doing so.
This is completely insane circular reasoning. Are the same criteria applied to all other executive decisions? Of course not. As if previous presidents needed to have a “good reason” to implement any of their policies.
This is a completely transparent move to undermine the Presidency, and a massive overreach from the judicial branch.