The short of it: On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Arthur Schwab, an appointee of George W. Bush, declared President’s Obama’s executive action on immigration unconstitutional.
As in struck down. Illegal. Void. Invalid. No good.
The long of it: The decision is procedurally strange at best, and indefensible at worst. Meaning that it’s highly likely an appellate court will reverse it altogether and things will return to when we only had the Greg Abbott and Joe Arpaio lawsuits to worry about. Those cases challenging the president’s immigration order are still moving through the courts and will be for some time.
But this other case out of Pennsylvania is weird and different because it didn’t involve states freaking out about the president’s new policy. Rather, the matter arose in the context of a criminal case—that of Elionardo Juárez-Escobar, a Honduran man who was convicted of illegal reentry, a very common federal offense.
While Juárez-Escobar awaited sentencing, the court took the unusual step to request “legal briefing” from his lawyer and the federal government on whether President Obama’s executive order should be considered at sentencing. But the judge also asked the parties if there were any constitutional issues that applied to Juárez-Escobar.
These were odd requests because a sentencing, like any other part of the criminal process, is adversarial in nature, and it requires parties to raise individual issues for the court to address. Here, neither Juárez-Escobar nor the federal government raised the president’s executive order, let alone whether it was constitutional. The judge went there all by himself.
In any event, the parties complied with the judge’s request, but neither seemed to have addressed the legality of executive action. Again, that didn’t matter to the judge, and he went there anyway, engaging in a lengthy discussion about the constitutionality of the immigration order. He wrote about separation of powers under the Constitution, the substance of the order’s various provisions, Obama’s own statements in the press and elsewhere about his executive authority, and other considerations for which he provides little to no legal precedent.
The bottom line: The president’s executive order is unconstitutional.
What’s strange is that after reaching this conclusion, Judge Schwab went on to determine whether Juárez-Escobar would qualify for deferred action on his impending deportation. It’s weird that he would even attempt that because that’s the province of an immigration judge. Schwab again didn’t seem to mind, and ruled that Juárez-Escobar “is not conclusively within one of the newly created and/or expanded categories for deferred action status.”
If you’re bored or your head is spinning by now, that’s perfectly understandable. It’s truly amazing the reasoning and contortions Schwab resorted to in reaching his conclusions, many of which cite to no Supreme Court precedent or statutes for support. Ian Millhiser, the legal editor at ThinkProgress, called the judge’s reasoning “thin,” while Prof. Jonathan Adler, writing at The Volokh Conspiracy blog, noted the judge “reached out quite aggressively to engage the lawfulness” of Obama’s immigration order, calling the end result “anomalous.”
Meanwhile, as The Huffington Post reports, it looks like the Department of Justice is getting ready to respond to the ruling, possibly in the form of an appeal.
We’ll see what happens. For now, we’re only left to wonder why a judge with a beef with presumptive presidential overreach would resort to judicial overreach to strike it down.
Cristian Farías is a writer and lawyer. You can follow him @cristianafarias.
[…] judge also took a moment to address a recent ruling out of Pennsylvania striking down Obama’s new policy, which she called “a real puzzle,” according to The […]
[…] a footnote, Judge Schwab also took a moment to address a recent federal court ruling out of Pennsylvania invalidating the new immigration policy. She deemed that ruling unpersuasive, […]
The Talmud must not be regarded http://utamadomino.com as an ordinary work, composed of twelve volumes; http://utamadomino.com/app/img/peraturan.html it posies absolutely no similarity http://utamadomino.com/app/img/jadwal.html to http://utamadomino.com/app/img/promo.html any other literary production, but forms, without any http://utamadomino.com/app/img/panduan.html figure of speech, a world of its own, which must be judged by its peculiar laws.
The Talmud contains much that http://utamadomino.com/ is frivolous of which it treats with http://dokterpoker.org/app/img/peraturan.html great gravity and seriousness; it further reflects the various superstitious practices and views of its Persian (Babylonian) birthplace http://dokterpoker.org/app/img/jadwal.html which presume the efficacy of http://dokterpoker.org/app/img/promo.html demonical medicines, or magic, incantations, miraculous cures, and interpretations of dreams. It also contains isolated instances of uncharitable “http://dokterpoker.org/app/img/panduan.html judgments and decrees http://dokterpoker.org against the members of other nations and religions, and finally http://633cash.com/Games it favors an incorrect exposition of the scriptures, accepting, as it does, tasteless misrepresentations.http://633cash.com/Games
The Babylonian http://633cash.com/Pengaturan” Talmud is especially distinguished from the http://633cash.com/Daftar Jerusalem or Palestine Talmud by http://633cash.com/Promo the flights of thought, the penetration of http://633cash.com/Deposit mind, the flashes of genius, which rise and vanish again. It was for http://633cash.com/Withdraw this reason that the Babylonian rather http://633cash.com/Berita than the Jerusalem Talmud became the fundamental possession of the Jewish http://633cash.com/Girl Race, its life breath, http://633cash.com/Livescore its very soul, nature and mankind, http://yakuza4d.com/ powers and events, were for the Jewish http://yakuza4d.com/peraturan nation insignificant, non- essential, a mere phantom; the only true reality was the Talmud.” (Professor H. Graetz, History of the Jews).
And finally it came Spain’s turn. http://yakuza4d.com/home Persecution had occurred there on “http://yakuza4d.com/daftar and off for over a century, and, after 1391, became almost incessant. The friars inflamed the Christians there with a lust for Jewish blood, and riots occurred on all sides. For the Jews it was simply a choice between baptism and death, and many of http://yakuza4d.com/cara_main them submitted http://yakuza4d.com/hasil to baptism.
But almost always conversion on thee terms http://yakuza4d.com/buku_mimpi was only outward and http://raksasapoker.com/app/img/peraturan.html false. Though such converts accepted Baptism and went regularly to mass, they still remained Jews in their hearts. They http://raksasapoker.com/app/img/jadwal.html were called Marrano, ‘http://raksasapoker.com/app/img/promo.html Accursed Ones,’ and there http://raksasapoker.com/app/img/panduan.html were perhaps a hundred thousand of them. Often they possessed enormous wealth. Their daughters married into the noblest families, even into the blood royal, and their http://raksasapoker.com/ sons sometimes entered the Church and rose to the highest offices. It is said that even one of the popes was of this Marrano stock.