My Give A Damn's Busted

If the Democrats don't start dealing on DACA, the GOP should terminate negotiations.

I often say my outrage meter is broken. I tend not to get worked up about things like where Keurig advertises and tweets on the President's timeline. But this morning my outrage meter hit eleventy. Judicial activism will do it every time.

According to Reuters:

A U.S. judge in San Francisco temporarily barred President Donald Trump’s administration on Tuesday from ending a program shielding young people brought to the United States illegally by their parents from deportation.

Under the ruling, the Administration is not obligated to review new DACA applications but it required to review current applicants for renewal. His ruling is based on his assertion that he believes the Plaintiff's will be successful in arguing that the government's decision to end the program was arbitrary. Apparently Judge Alsup's crystal ball was fully functional before announcing his ruling. Essentially, the program must remain in place as the other litigation is resolved.

I am not a lawyer. But best I can tell from reading the opinion the decision:

  • Even though the original DHS memo establishing DACA procedures was never subject to notice and comment, rescinding it somehow is under the Administrative Procedure Act
  • States even though the Supreme Court has ruled 'no court shall have jurisdiction to hear any cause or claim by or on behalf of an alien arising from the decision or action by the Attorney General to commence proceedings, adjudicate cases, or execute removal orders against any alien under this chapter", that ruling doesn't apply in this case.
  • Reinforced the standing of incidental plaintiffs who may employ or collect taxes from DACA recipients such as universities and municipalities
  • Imposes a nationwide injunction on ending the DACA program for current participants requiring the government to process renewal applications

The mental gymnastics I had to do to follow the logic being used in this opinion left my cerebral cortex in the shape of a pretzel. Bottom line it appears the decision is asserting that the obligation of the Trump administration in rescission of DACA is greater than that of the Obama administration in implementation. This is absurd and it appears the judge relies on a tweet from President Trump at the time of the rescission to assert the DHS can not end the program. A tweet. There is no disguising the activism in the text decision as written with the glowing language regarding the program and recipients throughout the text.

I am not heartless and honestly was very hopeful that much needed reforms to our immigration system and border security apparatus could be negotiated in exchange for dealing with the precarious status DACA recipients find themselves in. When your negotiating partner is focused on ONE thing, you can exact some disproportionate give and take. I learned that in Negotiation Skills 101 and have used it professionally for years.

After this morning I honestly no longer care. Spare me the narrative that all of the DACA recipients are upstanding members of society. We now know the previous administration violated their own administrative procedures to expedite approval for DACA recipients. Required background checks were "lean and lite" and in some cases not conducted at all. This is evident in the annual numbers of DACA recipients who have their status pulled for criminal and gang activity. It has happened every year since implementation and the number of those removed from the program is growing.

The Democrats have essentially gotten what they want through judicial fiat. The program in its current form will be continued for enrolled participants with the only doubt surrounding those whose status has already lapsed. The Dems incentive to negotiate is reduced for now, given this decision will take time to work its way through the appeals process. Let the party and their progressive allies who engage in judicial forum shopping to achieve their political ends hitch their wagon to continued success in the courts. The GOP should focus on the immigration and border security items they can accomplish in the budgetary process and sit on their wayward members in the Senate to get them done.

Friends, tyranny is not a tweet from the President insulting Jim Acosta. It is not Congress repealing the Individual Mandate. What tyranny looks like is a judge in a black robe who dismisses the separation of powers and uses the bench to achieve a political aim.

So that Trump can further burnish his amnesty credentials and bask in the praise of his liberal friends by extending Obama's DACA executive order indefinitely. The mistake his sucker followers keep making is believing that Trump's "wins" will be their "wins".

Always remember this: The entire premise of progressives and the other leftists of the Democrat Party is to destroy the United States of America, obliterate the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, destroy Western Civilization, remove all voting rights in guise of socialist dictate, and finally, to kill all conservatives and non-progressives (per Congressman Scalise and Rand Paul).

It's been fun watching Ann Coulter have an apoplectic fit over the realization that she sold out her credibility and placed her entire love and faith in a lifelong liberal Democrat charlatan. Hey, Toots, we tried to warn you in June 2015 that just because he read your book and said he'd build a wall didn't mean anything, but did you listen? Nooooooooooo!!!!

She tweeted a while ago, "Instead of rushing to wreck our country with a mass amnesty with DACA, why doesn't the GOP congress start impeaching judges?" Yeah, why don't they reclaim their just authority under separation of powers? I mean other than they don't want to because they share their Dem masters' agendas of replacing the citizenry with a new, more yokeable polity, that is.

If they really wanted to save some budget money, they should simply disband Congress. Simply dismiss the elected representatives and their massive staffs, because under the system of irrevocable judicial supremacy, our rights eventually come down to what five robed gods on the Supreme Court decree them to be. Just give Anthony Kennedy a $1 billion per year salary to flip a coin and decide what rights us serfs have?

ObamaCare was saved - TWICE! - by our time's Roger B. Taney because he wanted the WaPo Editorial Board to stop pantsing him and taking his milk money. Over 7000 years of civilization and how it organized family units was declared a hate crime by Anthony Kennedy because he wanted some of that sweet media love that comes from destroying normalcy. Nearly 60 million people have been exterminated in the past 45 years because another Republican-chosen Justice deemed women exclusively eligible for a James Bond-esque license to kill. (Please tell me more about my supposed male privilege.)

The only reason Trump has appeared so "conservative" is because the Democrats' full-throttle jihad against him forced him to fight back as a Republican. If they'd come on softer, he would've gladly given them what they want and he since he shares their ideology and hungers for approval from the NYT, he wants as well.

Prediction: When the Dems seize control of Congress in November, they'd be insane to impeach Trump because they wouldn't be able to convict and he'd lash back by vetoing everything they sent up. No, what they'll do is use the THREAT of impeachment to cow him into submission. They'll say, "Sign the amnesty and single-payer and whatever else bills we send you or we impeach you and you go down in the history books as a disgraced, failed President. Or you can cooperate and decline to run in 2020 and leave without the stain on your record and plenty of accomplishments that the NYT will laud you for."

Why is there no consequence for such blatant abuses of the judicial system? Do we need a judicial "three strikes" law to get these incompetent ideologues off the bench?

Great article on judicial tyranny, Stacey. It's sad that some posters have to make it all about Trump as they do everything.

Conversations