Obama's immigration actions ruled unconstitutional by Penn judge

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2014/12/judge-rules-obama-immigration-actions-unconstitutional-200043.html?hp=t1_r

Drat.

[Antonio the Sixth]

the f**k

[MaxQue]

A partisan, incompetent judge which would never have been nominated in any other country.

EDIT: To those who don't believe me, check his Wikipedia article. A judge with a very poor reputation, which was removed a few times from his cases by the Appeal Court.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_J._Schwab

[Grumpier Than Thou]

Bush appointee who sent Tommy Chong to jail. HP. Next.

[Lief 🗽]

I hope Congress does the right thing and impeaches this incompetent judge ASAP.

[SteveRogers]

Lol, just skimmed over this. Obama's executive order doesn't have anything to do with this case. It doesn't even sound like the defendant here raised the issue of the new policy in the case. The judge just on his own initiative asked the parties to brief the issue of whether Obama's immigration actions were relevant to the case. 

This judge be trollin'. This won't have any impact on anything.

[The_Doctor]

What's the next level up? I assume there's a Democratic judge or Democratic staffed Appeals Court that would review the case.

[Mehmentum]

Lol, just skimmed over this. Obama's executive order doesn't have anything to do with this case. It doesn't even sound like the defendant here raised the issue of the new policy in the case. The judge just on his own initiative asked the parties to brief the issue of whether Obama's immigration actions were relevant to the case. 

This judge be trollin'. This won't have any impact on anything.

It might have an impact on the conversation.  It could give credence to arguments about the executive order's unconstitutionality. 

[SteveRogers]

What's the next level up? I assume there's a Democratic judge or Democratic staffed Appeals Court that would review the case.

This is rather unlikely to be appealed.

[user12345]

This "judge" seems more interested in fame than actually performing his duties.

[SteveRogers]

This "judge" seems more interested in fame than actually performing his duties.

No kidding. The immigrant defendant in question already plead guilty before the judge randomly ordered the parties to argue this issue. He's literally just making the poor guy and his lawyer (probably a public defender) show up to random nonsensical hearings that have no bearing on the case. Neither side is even challenging Obama's executive order, the judge's opinion already concluded that regardless of the constitutionality the order almost certainly doesn't pertain to this defendant, and yet at the end of this decision he orders the parties to show up for another round of "arguments" on this issue.

[pbrower2a]

Lol, just skimmed over this. Obama's executive order doesn't have anything to do with this case. It doesn't even sound like the defendant here raised the issue of the new policy in the case. The judge just on his own initiative asked the parties to brief the issue of whether Obama's immigration actions were relevant to the case. 

This judge be trollin'. This won't have any impact on anything.

For those who don't understand this -- judges in practice as narrowly as possible. Nobody questions whether aliens violating criminal laws are to be deported. 

[Antonio the Sixth]

I hope Congress does the right thing

lol

[NewYorkExpress]

Unless the Supreme's are willing to rule that all executive orders since 1789 are unconstitutional, this will be overturned by somebody.

[Beet]

The courts have been really shameless since O was elected. They need to keep in mind they're supposed to be impartial arbiters of the law, not another wing of Congress.

[Antonio the Sixth]

What's the next level up? I assume there's a Democratic judge or Democratic staffed Appeals Court that would review the case.

This is rather unlikely to be appealed.

Wait, what? How can it not be appealed?

[SteveRogers]

What's the next level up? I assume there's a Democratic judge or Democratic staffed Appeals Court that would review the case.

This is rather unlikely to be appealed.

Wait, what? How can it not be appealed?

So the deal is that there's not really anything to appeal. The criminal defendant here had already plead guilty. Then the judge on his own initiative asked the parties to argue whether the executive order impacted the case in any way. The judge's opinion concludes that (1) the executive order is unconstitutional, and (2) even if it were constitutional, it probably doesn't have any bearing on this case. Then at the end the judge basically says, "but if you still think for some reason that it might apply to you, you have the option of either seeking to withdraw your guilty plea, or sticking with the guilty plea and getting the sentence that had already been recommended." I'm guessing the defendant just sticks with his guilty plea, so there's nothing for him to challenge. And the court didn't issue an injunction against the government or anything interfering with the executive order, so there's nothing for the government to appeal.

Technically the judge's determination that the executive order is unconstitutional is precedent in that district that would be relevant if some other case involving the order comes up in that district, but for right now it really has no impact on anything. It's all just a rather strange action on the judge's part.


Here's the actual conclusion of the opinion and the order at the end for reference:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[badgate]

I half expected to open this thread and find out it was a mock court at Penn State