Obama had issued his executive order after House Republicans refused to bring to the floor for a vote a 2013 bipartisan Senate legislation which provided a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, HSNW reported. “With his usual arrogant tone, Obama told the nation that he decided what is good for America and its people. He arbitrarily changed or voided laws as he saw fit and to me that is a serious breach of constitutional law,” said former police captain, Morris Delvechio.
Although the GOP lawmakers in Washington made statements opposing Obama’s laws, they did little to try to stop his actions which led to a tsunami of illegal aliens crossing the border into the U.S. Southwest. But 26 states with Republican governors legally challenged Obama’s far-reaching executive order,claiming that once again the so-called constitutional scholar had disregarded the separation of powers by granting a blanket deportation deferment to millions of undocumented immigrants without any action by the federal legislature.
They went on record as saying that Obama’s argument that “his action amounts to nothing more than common prosecutorial discretion was wrong, because such discretion should be applied on a case-by-case basis, not to an entire category of potential law-breakers.”
A federal court judge in the state of Texas ruled in favor of the 26 GOP governors, and when the Justice Department brought the case to the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, those judges upheld the lower court’s decision in November 2015. A panel of the 5th Circuit said the program changed the designation for the immigrants which would give the illegal aliens eligibility for federal and state benefits that wouldn’t otherwise be available.
Meanwhile on Thursday, former federal prosecutor Larry Klayman, who had founded Judicial Watch and is now the founder and president of Freedom Watch, saluted the four originalists on the Supreme Court for holding fast in effectively affirming the decisions by a Texas federal court and the Fifth Circuit blocking President Barack Hussein Obama’s executive amnesty for over 5 million illegal aliens. Klayman believes that the decision will prevent likely Muslim terrorists from entering the U.S. as refugees especially since the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation contradicted Obama’s claim regarding “the vetting” of asylum seekers from Syria, Iraq and other Muslim nations.
Klayman, along with Maricopa County, Arizona, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, were the first to challenge this unconstitutional executive amnesty but drew an Obama-appointed judge who dismissed the case claiming it was only a political ploy.
Later an Obama-packed federal appeals court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, affirmed the lower court’s decision, uttering hardly a word about the merits of the case. However, a fine judge, the Honorable Andrew S. Hanen, of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas took the correct and legally honest legal path and blocked Obama’s amnesty, according to Klayman, who has made a name for himself as a government gadfly.
The Obama Justice Department, led by Attorney General Loretta Lynch, the president’s pliant law enforcement officer, took an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and, in a “slam dunk,” quickly lost again.
Thursday’s Supreme Court ruling not only underscores just how political the High Court has become, but cements Judge Hanen’s ruling. The amicus brief filed by Klayman and Arpaio is credited with aiding in achieving the victory, as did their initial complaint before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, which was virtually copied by Texas and the myriad of other states that later mounted the court challenge before Judge Hanen.
Klayman had this to say for himself and his client, the man known as America’s Sheriff Joe Arpaio:
“Having started the ball rolling on this challenge to President Obama’s illegal and unconstitutional executive actions granting amnesty to millions of illegal aliens including likely Muslim terrorists who have crossed our borders and are here on bogus student visas and other subterfuges, we are thankful that the so-called conservatives on the Supreme Court held fast to the leftists on the High Court. While we have little hope that President Obama will now take action to deport these illegal aliens, particularly since they are a large illegal voting block for the Democrats this fall, this Supreme Court ruling at least tells Obama and his allies that their lawlessness will not be countenanced. Unlike a judge in Arizona who has been presiding over a compromised and ethically conflicted trial of Sheriff Arpaio that also concerns illegal immigrants in Maricopa County, four justices of the Supreme Court did the right thing and shut the door to Obama’s lack of respect for the will of We the People. They legally stood up to an out-of-control president who rules like he is King George III in 1776. As bequeathed to us by our Founding Fathers in the Constitution, this is the proper role of the judiciary, to serve as a check and balance to government tyranny.”