A federal judge appointed to the bench by President Barack Obama on Tuesday afternoon blocked President Donald Trump’s order to withhold federal monies from sanctuary cities. Not surprising is the fact the judge who made the ruling served as a bundler of hundreds of thousands of dollars for the Reelect Obama campaign. In the vernacular of street-cops in cities like New York, Chicago and San Francisco, this jurist is nothing but a bagman for the Democratic Party, according to several former police officials.
Federal Judge William Orrick III, of the Northern District of California, issued an injunction against the Trump administration after the city of San Francisco and county of Santa Clara sued over the president’s plan to withhold some handouts for cities and counties that that harbor illegal immigrants and refuse to assist Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.
“In essence, what this judge is saying is that San Francisco politicians can thumb their noses at the Trump administration without consequences even though the laws back Trump’s actions,” according to former police officer, Michael Baker, a political consultant. “This is another example of our nation becoming a lawless society based on the whims of shyster lawyers wearing black robe,” he added.
The 63-year-old Orrick, was nominated by President Obama on June 11, 2012 and renominated on January 3, 2013, to a seat vacated by Charles R. Breyer. Judge Orrick was confirmed by the Senate on May 15, 2013, and received commission on May 16, 2013.
In 2015, this same judge issued a restraining order against the advocacy group responsible for undercover videos purporting to show Planned Parenthood employees plotting to sell baby organs.
The Federalist found that Orrick raised at least $200,000 for Obama and donated more than $30,000 to groups supporting him.
In the vernacular of street-cops in cities like New York, Chicago and San Francisco, this jurist is nothing but a former bagman for the Democratic Party, according to several former police officials.”
The sanctuary city case is expected to work its way through the federal court system and will likely be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court eventually.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions and the U.S. Department of Justice had sent warning letters to nine jurisdictions which were identified in a May 2016 report by the Department of Justice’s Inspector General as having laws that potentially violate 8 U.S.C. § 1373 a/k/a “sanctuary city policies.”
At almost the same time as Judge Orrick announced his decision, Attorney General Sessions issued the following statement after his meeting with representatives from the U.S. Conference of Mayors in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday:
“The Department of Justice will fulfill our responsibility to uphold and enforce our nation’s immigration laws, including 8 U.S.C. 1373. Under the Obama administration, the Department of Justice required certain grantees to certify compliance with federal law, including 8 U.S.C. 1373, as a condition for receiving grant funding. Last year, the Department of Justice’s Inspector General reported that 10 jurisdictions were potentially in violation of 8 U.S.C. 1373, including because they had policies that restricted local law enforcement from sharing information about criminal aliens in their custody.
“My letter has required those jurisdictions to submit a response by June 30 certifying they are in compliance. To date, only one has replied and we await the responses of the others. We will evaluate those responses to ensure the requirements of these grants are met. I once again urge these cities and jurisdictions to reevaluate their policies, protect their citizens and comply with the law.
“We are pleased that the mayors who met with us today assured us they want to be in compliance with the law. The vast majority of state and local jurisdictions are in compliance and want to work with federal law enforcement to keep their communities safe. Of course, compliance with 8 U.S.C. 1373 is the minimum the American people should expect. We want all jurisdictions to enthusiastically support the laws of the United States that require the removal of criminal aliens, as many jurisdictions already do.”