Judge Refueses to Restart Amnesty, Says Obama’s Lawyers Lied

A federal judge refused to lift the order the issued in February blocking President Obama’s unilateral action on amnesty and scolded the president’s lawyers for “misleading” the court.

U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Hanen of Texas issued a temporary injunction against the implementation of the president’s executive action after 26 states sued against it. Hanen argued the executive action raised serious questions about the power of the executive branch and the burden of the action to the states.

The Department of Justice, however, proceeded to grant 100,000 illegal immigrants work permits through Obama’s executive action anyway.

Hanen said the lawyers defending the president’s executive actions on immigration engaged in “misconduct” by repeatedly suggesting Obama’s most recent round of immigration moves had not yet been implemented when one key change already had been.

“The administration’s assertions in the immigration case have been “misleading,” “troublesome,” and “belied by the facts,” Judge  Hanen wrote .”Any number of federal judges, given this misconduct, would consider striking the Government’s pleadings.” Hanen wrote that he had decided not strike down the law because doing so would effectively end the case altogether and the issue at stake, the extent executive power, is of great national importance.

“The administration’s assertions in the immigration case have been “misleading,” “troublesome,” and “belied by the facts,” Judge  Hanen wrote.” Any number of federal judges, given this misconduct, would consider striking the Government’s pleadings.

Hanen wrote that he had decided not strike down the law because doing so would effectively end the case altogether and the issue at stake, the extent executive power, is of great national importance.

“The issues at stake here have national significance and deserve to be fully considered on the merits by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and, in all probability, the Supreme Court of the United States, he wrote. Throwing the case out now would “not only penalize those with an interest in the outcome, but would more importantly penalize the country, which needs and deserves a resolution on the merits.”

The judge demanded the federal government turn over documents showing its thought-process as it grappled with how to tell the court that it had already been processing applications.

“This Court expects all parties, including the Government of the United States, to act in a forthright manner and not hide behind deceptive representations and half-truths,” he wrote. “Whether by ignorance, omission, purposeful misdirection, or because they were misled by their clients, the attorneys for the Government misrepresented the facts.”

Texas leads a 26-state bipartisan coalition fighting the President’s attempt to unilaterally grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants. Joining Texas in the lawsuit are: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia and Wisconsin.