Can, indeed should, the leadership of the Obama Justice Department, perhaps even the President himself, be disbarred?
A furious U.S. District Court judge has sharply rebuked the U.S. Department of Justice for acts that would have resulted in substantial ethics charges being brought against any law firm.
The case concerns the Deferred Action for Parent of Americans program, initiated without legislative authority by President Obama in 2014. The intent of the action is to defer deportation of illegal aliens who are parents of a U.S. citizen or a lawful permanent resident, sometimes known as anchor babies. The illegals would be given protected status and the right to apply for work permits. Up to five million illegals could be affected.
Opponents of the move have argued that the President ignored his constitutional duty to insure that the nation’s laws are faithfully executed. They argue that Mr. Obama did not have the authority to engage in action that was legislative in character, and that even if the measure was regulatory in nature, the Administrative Procedure Act mandated that there be an opportunity for the public to comment on it before its implementation. In every way possible, it is obvious that the President acted far beyond any legal authority.
As previously reported by the New York Analysis of Policy and Government, the measure was challenged by 26 states. A preliminary injunction was granted to the states by U.S. District Court Judge Andrew S. Hanen. The Court turned down Washington’s request to delay the stay. Judge Hanen also issued an order rebuking the White House for granting three-year periods of deferred action to 108,081 individuals between the announcement of DAPA and the preliminary injunction, despite The Department of Justice’s denial that it had done so. The Justice Department, in other words, was caught in a lie.
Judge Hanen reacted with fury to the Justice Department’s misdeeds. “The Government claims that the reason its lawyers were not candid with the Court was that they either ‘lost focus on the fact’ or that somehow ‘the fact receded in memory or awareness.’ Yet the Government’s lawyers chose not to tell the Plaintiff States or the Court…what counsel did borders on the incredible. The duties of a Government lawyer, and in fact of any lawyer, are threefold: (1) tell the truth; (2) do not mislead the Court; and (3) do not allow the Court to be misled…The Government’s lawyers failed on all three fronts.”
Some alternative treatment for erectile issues is viagra sans prescription canada, Silagra, Eriacta, Caverta etc. There are still ways to turn out to be known previously starting a lowest cost viagra particular abortion. Buy acquisition de viagra view this VigRX plus to cure erectile dysfunction and also to achieve stable erection of the penile region. Very rarely, it can cause backache, indigestion and a stuffy nose. levitra price
According to the legal memorandum and decision issued by the Court on May 19th, an order was given to provide the 26 States that sued the Obama Administration some avenue for relief from the possibility of any damage that may result from the misconduct of the Department of Justice and to prevent future harm due to the Government’s misrepresentations.
The Court also moved to deter and prevent future misconduct by Justice Department lawyers by ordering an appropriately tailored continuing legal education program, “which will not only serve to educate the uninitiated, but more importantly will remind all trial lawyers that their honest and ethical participation is a necessity for the proper administration of justice. It also compels the Attorney General, or her designee, to take the necessary steps to ensure that DOJ attorneys act honestly in the future.”
Despite a record debt so vast that any other organization would be considered functionally bankrupt, (with additional debt being piled on each year and many crucial needs being underfunded) the Obama Administration has engaged in extraordinary and extreme measures aimed at insuring that the costly tidal wave of illegal immigrants remains unsuppressed. Despite the expenses this brings to the American taxpayer, the heightened competition for scarce jobs, the increase in crime, the spread of disease, and the potential for infiltration by drug cartels and terrorists, the current White House has vigorously opposed any attempt to staunch the human flood.
Lying to the Court now must be added to the White House’s list of inappropriate, illegal practices it has engaged in to counter any move to address the crisis.
The underlying issue of the President’s lack of authority will eventually be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.