Abbott: Federal judge halts Obama immigration initiatives

Abbott: Federal judge halts Obama immigration initiatives

Associated Press | February 16, 2015 | Updated: February 16, 2015 11:19pm

http://ww2.hdnux.com/photos/31/00/01.../3/622x350.jpg

BROWNSVILLE — U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen late Monday ruled in favor of Texas and 25 other states that challenged President Obama's executive action on immigration, according to a statement from Gov. Greg Abbott.


Check back for updates. Abbott's statement is below:


AUSTIN – Governor Greg Abbott today released the following statement regarding the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas' decision on the lawsuit filed by a Texas-led coalition of 26 states challenging President Obama's executive action on immigration:
"President Obama abdicated his responsibility to uphold the United States Constitution when he attempted to circumvent the laws passed by Congress via executive fiat, and Judge Hanen's decision rightly stops the President's overreach in its tracks. We live in a nation governed by a system of checks and balances, and the President's attempt to by-pass the will of the American people was successfully checked today. The District Court's ruling is very clear — it prevents the President from implementing the policies in 'any and all aspects.' "


Following President Obama's announcement of his plan to take executive action and grant legal status to individuals illegally present in the United States, then-Attorney General Abbott filed a lawsuit challenging the president's action on Dec. 3. Texas was initially joined by 16 states in filing the lawsuit; that number has since grown to 26 states.

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-te...on-6084523.php

Here are Governor Abbot's tweets going out tonight about this exciting news!

• Greg Abbott ‏@GregAbbott_TX 15m15 minutes ago
  Here's my statement on Texas' victory halting Obama's Executive Amnesty. http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Abbott-Federal-judge-halts-Obama-immigration-6084523.php … #txlege #tcot @TexasGOP
  Details
  
  
  
• https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images...324_bigger.jpg Greg Abbott ‏@GregAbbott_TX 1h1 hour ago
  BREAKING: Federal Judge just granted my request to halt Obama's Executive Amnesty Order Nationwide. More later. #txlege #tcot @TexasGOP
  
  
  
  
  
  

Whoo, hoo, that's great! As a teacher I've been really really frustrated about how low the bar's been moved for our English students. They simply have to adapt to the rules of their host country or things will continue to deteriorate due to cultural differences. They are, no matter what they say and believe, visitors here. They haven't earned the right of residency no matter how long they've been here. It's our job as adult educators to facilitate assimilation to the culture and laws of their host country. We can't do that if the bar keeps moving and laws are inconsistent and mushy. For the benefit of both citizens and immigrants they must be held accountable for and man-up to do the right thing and taking care of their own immigration woes, not expect the American people to foot the bill. I've had students who've untangled their own messes so I know it's possible. Yay to that judge for his courage in confronting that illogical and counterproductive legislation!

This is wonderful news! Lets work towards and hope for the rare occasion when the Courts actually resolve a situation for the American People.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

This is wonderful news! Lets work towards and hope for the rare occasion when the Courts actually resolve a situation for the American People.

---

JUDY.
HOW COME THIS JUDGE OR ANY OTHER JUDGE DON'T IMPEACH HIM ? THEY DO HAVE THAT RIGHT THE USA DID SIGN THE PAPER ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by southBronx

JUDY.
HOW COME THIS JUDGE OR ANY OTHER JUDGE DON'T IMPEACH HIM ? THEY DO HAVE THAT RIGHT THE USA DID SIGN THE PAPER ?

---

The Courts can't do it, the US House of Representatives has to impeach, and then the Senate holds a trial to remove a President from office. As appetizing as that is, it's also extremely difficult. To me, the criminality of what this Administration has done meets the test for impeachment based on the high crime of handing out taxpayer money to illegal aliens without specific legislative authority or a direct appropriation. That alone seems to me to be more than adequate to remove a President from office, because it's a simple form of embezzlement and misuse of funds.

The process of impeachment requires a simple majority in the US House of Representatives to draw the articles of impeachment, but the removal from office itself which is an act of the US Senate, requires a 2/3 majority in the US Senate, which is very difficult.

It was never intended that a President be removed from office in this manner unless the charges were very serious and universally considered high crimes. So as much as we'd like to jump forward 2 years to a new President, the reality is our Congress needs to do its job and require that the Executive Branch does its job. That's been the failure. Congress, at least in the US House of Representatives, is coming around and along, but the Senate doesn't have enough Senators who view these matters the way we do, as yet. Hopefully, in 2 years, we can help elect not only more House members but also more Senators who stand up for American workers, American citizens and US taxpayers.

Democrats who are doing so much for foreign persons and illegal aliens, people who shouldn't even be in our country to begin with let alone afforded a special class criminal status that enables them to escape prosecution and collect huge financial rewards to boot, are going to have a hard time in 2016 trying to defend their actions to save their seats in Congress.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

The Courts can't do it, the US House of Representatives has to impeach, and then the Senate holds a trial to remove a President from office. As appetizing as that is, it's also extremely difficult. To me, the criminality of what this Administration has done meets the test for impeachment based on the high crime of handing out taxpayer money to illegal aliens without specific legislative authority or a direct appropriation. That alone seems to me to be more than adequate to remove a President from office, because it's a simple form of embezzlement and misuse of funds.

The process of impeachment requires a simple majority in the US House of Representatives to draw the articles of impeachment, but the removal from office itself which is an act of the US Senate, requires a 2/3 majority in the US Senate, which is very difficult.

It was never intended that a President be removed from office in this manner unless the charges were very serious and universally considered high crimes. So as much as we'd like to jump forward 2 years to a new President, the reality is our Congress needs to do its job and require that the Executive Branch does its job. That's been the failure. Congress, at least in the US House of Representatives, is coming around and along, but the Senate doesn't have enough Senators who view these matters the way we do, as yet. Hopefully, in 2 years, we can help elect not only more House members but also more Senators who stand up for American workers, American citizens and US taxpayers.

Democrats who are doing so much for foreign persons and illegal aliens, people who shouldn't even be in our country to begin with let alone afforded a special class criminal status that enables them to escape prosecution and collect huge financial rewards to boot, are going to have a hard time in 2016 trying to defend their actions to save their seats in Congress.

---

JUDY
WELL HOW COME THEY IMPEACH THIS JOHNSON BACK IN 1920 THEY JUST HAND HIM PAPER & SAID HE WAS NOT DOING HIS JOB RIGHT( THANK YOU FOR EMAIL ME BACK & YOUR WORK IS VERY GOOD)
southBronx

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by southBronx

JUDY
WELL HOW COME THEY IMPEACH THIS JOHNSON BACK IN 1920 THEY JUST HAND HIM PAPER & SAID HE WAS NOT DOING HIS JOB RIGHT( THANK YOU FOR EMAIL ME BACK & YOUR WORK IS VERY GOOD)
southBronx

---

Thank you, southBronx!

Andrew Johnson, like Bill Clinton, was successfully impeached by the US House of Representatives, but Johnson like Clinton, was not removed from office by the US Senate, so both failed in their mission. So far, there has not been a successful impeachment and removal of a President of the United States. 2 impeachments by House of Representatives 0 removals by US Senate.

There's really not much we can do in this area because the Senate will never remove Obama from office.

We have to cut the head off this snake by cutting off the money, something we can do through the US House of Representatives, the people's house, the house that controls the purse of our government, starting with no money or authority to use fees for DHS to spend legalizing people whom our immigration laws state are illegal aliens and required to be removed from the country.

Judge Andrew S. Hanen, Obama's nightmare paralyzing Democrat's immigration policy

Allexia Acosta
[translated from the original Spanish]

Tuesday, 17/02/15 - 15:36

• First nominated by [Pres. George H. W.] Bush in 1992 and also in 2002 by President George W. Bush, Hanen has spent his entire career in Texas.
  
• Last year he came out against the authorities who helped reunite children who came alone to the border, with their parents or relatives in the United States.

http://images.lainformacion.com/cms/...4205732-28.jpgJudge Andrew S. Hanen, Obama's nightmare
paralyzing the Democrat's immigration policy

Demands by Texas and 24 other southern states, against Obama's latest decree on immigration, could not have fallen [into] more receptive hands. It is not the first time [that] federal judge Andrew S. Hanen is deciding on these issues.

This time [he] has blocked the implementation of a decree by President Barack Obama, [which] would regularize million[s of] immigrants, or at least delay their deportation.

Just over a year ago, in December of 2013, [Judge Hanen "slapped"] the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

The judge nominated in 2002 by the then president, Republican George W. Bush, [ruled in 2013 that] Customs and Border Protection agents 'collaborated' in smuggling children.

According to [Judge] Hanen, to facilitate the reunion of minors taken to the border by the mafias, [with] parents residing illegally in the United States, "rewards criminal behavior."

The judge [cited] at least five cases in which [CBP] agents, after arresting people recruited to take children to the United States, personally moved [the children to be] with [their] parents, who were in the United States illegally.

"The Department of Homeland Security rewards criminal behavior rather than protecting the implementation of the law. What is most worrying is that it helps parents to risk the lives of their children (...) It's just like [confiscating smuggled] drugs or weapons and personally taking them to [the] criminals who ordered their importation," he said.

Hanen's ruling came [in December of 2013,] at a time when borders flooded with children, who came just from Latin America alone, was the order of the day. There was talk of 50,000 children trapped in "immigration limbo."

Specifically, Obama's decree particularly benefits the undocumented children born in the United States or [who have resided in] the country more than five years.

The judge's view about the performance of the authorities was what led conservative activist [Atty.] Orly Taitz to sue in Hanen's court. [Last] summer, Taitz requested [an injunction against] releasing illegal immigrants from southern Texas or shipping them to other states.

Taitz asked that immigrants spend forty-two months [in custody? in quarantine?] and submit to medical tests [in order] to not create a public health hazard. But there was no case. The judge rejected the request because there was "no expert [witness]" to support allegations [by] Taitz.

Born in Illinois, Hanen, 62, has [worked] his entire career in the state of Texas. Married with a daughter, he was nominated in 1992 by President Bush (the father), but the application was unsuccessful then.

In his latest ruling on Obama's decree, Judge Hanen said "the government's inability to ensure border security has exacerbated illegal immigration to this country."

With today's decision, according to The New York Times, the judge emphasized that the Obama administration did not respect the legal procedures for the enforcement of the decree. Actually, according to the Washington Post, the decision simply means buying time.

The plaintiff states are Texas, Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, North Carolina, South Carolina, North Dakota, South Dakota, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio , Oklahoma, Utah, West Virginia, and Wisconsin [and joined by Nevada].

The complaint argued that Obama "changes the law and establishes a new policy, exceeds his constitutional authority and disturbs the delicate balance of powers."

"The constitutional overreach by President Obama is clear and very worrying," they said in their plaint.

The decree announced by Obama last November 20 extends protection against deportation to half of the 11.2 million "undocumented" [aliens] estimated [to be] residing in the United States. The measure guarantees them a work permit and [allows them to] stay for up to three years.

noticias.lainformacion.com/asuntos-sociales/inmigrantes-ilegales/el-juez-andrew-s-hanen-la-pesadilla-de-obama-que-paraliza-la-politica-migratoria-democrata_OyeeXg2QjOcQApgTD2WRD6/

[ED.: unlike the U.S. lamestream media under the cone of silence, the media in Mexico acknowledge that Atty. Orly Taitz brought to court and pleaded this lawsuit.]