Arpaio’s Lawsuit to Stop Obama’s Delayed Deportation Back in Federal Court

Within two hours of Barack Obama’s November announcement of his delayed deportation memorandum, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio filed a lawsuit to block Obama’s actions. The lawsuit claims that Obama’s 2012 DACA action and his Nov. 20, 2014 executive order is an abuse of the president’s role ‘in our nation’s constitutional architecture’ and that it ‘exceeds the powers of the president within the US Constitution.’

However, a liberal federal judge appointed by Obama dismissed the lawsuit without even hearing arguments about the merit of the case. Judge Beryl A. Howell of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia was named to the bench in July 2010 and confirmed by the Democratic controlled Senate in December 2010. Howell clearly protected Obama when she ruled:

“The plaintiff’s case raises important questions regarding the impact of illegal immigration on this nation, but the questions amount to generalized grievances which are not proper for the judiciary to address.”

take our poll - story continues below

Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Godfather Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: The ‘Science’ Behind Michelle Obama’s Hated School Lunch Rules Ends Up Being a Fraud

As I wrote then:

“Excuse me!!! Since when is charging the man occupying the White House with violating the US Constitution just a generalized grievance and not worthy to be heard in federal court? Then where does one go to charge someone in Obama’s position with violating the Constitution? No matter what Obama thinks, he is not above the law.”

Larry Klayman, Arpaio’s attorney filed an appeal to get the lawsuit back into court. Klayman is also the founder of Freedom Watch, and is well known for his legal challenges against many of Obama’s illegal actions. When Howell dismissed the case, Klayman stated that her actions were ‘highly political’ and based on ‘her subjective politics.’

The federal appeals court not only accepted the appeal but ordered that the case be accelerated due the constitutional issues raised by the lawsuit. According to Freedom Watch:

“(January 14, 2015, Washington, D.C.) Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ordered an expedited briefing schedule for the case styled Joseph Arpaio v. Barack Obama, et al, (Case No. 14-5325). Arpaio and his lawyer, former Justice Department prosecutor and founder of Freedom Watch, Larry Klayman, appealed the lower court’s decision dismissing the case only minutes after it was issued. The Honorable Beryl A. Howell of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (1:14-cv-01966) found a lack of standing to sue, even though Sheriff Arpaio provided affidavits and evidence in court that he and his office have been and will be significantly harmed by President Obama’s Executive Orders granting what is essentially amnesty to almost 5 million illegal immigrants.”

When Klayman received word from the federal appeals court, he commented:

“The President does not have the authority to rewrite immigration laws. Legislation and national policy are enacted by Congress, not the President. It is a big victory to Sheriff Arpaio and indeed the American people that the D.C. Circuit recognized the need for this case to be quickly resolved before Obama’s unconstitutional amnesty program goes into full effect this spring. There are constitutional issues of great magnitude at stake and we are confident that the D.C. Circuit will put a legal stop to this illegal activity, which seeks to end-run congressional authority. I am grateful for Sheriff Arpaio’s courage in pursuing this very necessary legal action.”

The House has also taken action to block and undo a number of Obama’s immigration policies including rescinding the delayed deportation and to reverse his 2012 DACA action which allowed the children of illegals who were brought here when they were young to remain in the US. Of the five amendments that dealt with Obama’s immigration issues, the voting was clearly along party lines with Democrats voting against every one.

Obama has promised to veto any bill that comes to him that reverses any of his executive actions on immigration. Even though Republicans now have control of the Senate, they do not have enough votes to override a veto, which means that our best hope at this stage is that the federal appeals court rules on law and the Constitution and blocks the delayed deportation and forces Obama to start obeying federal law as passed by Congress.

Previous Soros Gave $33 Million to Ferguson Protesters
Next Publisher Bans Any Mention of Pork and Pigs in Books to Avoid Offending Muslims


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.