DHS broke judge’s order, approved amnesty applications despite injunction

by Stephen Dinan  |  published on May 9, 2015


President Obama’s lawyers admitted to a federal judge late Thursday that they had broken the court’s injunction halting the administration’s new deportation amnesty, issuing thousands of work permits even after Judge Andrew S. Hanen had ordered the program stopped.

The stunning admission, filed just before midnight in Texas, where the case is being heard, is the latest misstep for the administration’s lawyers, who are facing possible sanctions by Judge Hanen for their continued problems in arguing the case.

The Justice Department lawyers said Homeland Security, which is the defendant in the case, told them Wednesday that an immigration agency had approved about 2,000 applications for three-year work permits, which was part of Mr. Obama’s new amnesty, even after Judge Hanen issued his Feb. 16 injunction halting the entire program.

Top Obama officials, including Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, had repeatedly assured Congress they had fully halted the program and were complying with the order.

  • Jimbo

    The big shots all seem to be exempt from the laws they expect US to obey. I’d like to believe Obama and his people would get punished for this, but they never do.

  • Greg137

    Why should we listen to these lawless creeps? The Feds just blatantly ignore the due process.. So let us just get rid of them… The DHS knowingly ignores the law which makes them more like a pirate militia and less like an agency of the federal government… So here is an idea let us issue a state to state injunction to allow the governors of the 50 states to mandate the DHS must abide the law or they must leave the country… We don’t need the DHS any longer… I am a poor man on social security and I donate to the conservative cause every chance that I get, which isn’t often enough.. If you have a job or you are making more than 7 to 8,000 on disability a year you have no excuse… Yes there might be a loop-hole if you are single, but I live with my mom who is also retired also living on social security… But really that is not the point… We need the people of America to stand up for their liberty… USE YOUR LIBERTY OR LOSE IT….

    • Jimbo

      We ought to all announce that until B.O. starts obeying the law, we will not either. A tax revolt would be good too. But it will never happen. Who wants to be first. Can we really trust that the other guy will do his part.

  • Busterak1

    We should make sure that all these corrupt public officials carry their corruption for a lifetime, these are department heads that knowingly have entered into a public trust and have used that trust to do their own or someone else’s bidding and do so in a way that costs the public. If we had a congress they should be concerned that Jeh Johnson, Barack Obama, Eric Holder and now Loretta Lynch and scores of others all believe they are above the law and they all operate under the protection of the head Criminal Barack Obama. This is called Racketeering and is a federal offense and he listen folks if the top executives are doing this then what kind of message does it send to rank and file and citizens. If they can do it then why can’t I ? We should all write the Dept. of Justice and I already have and stop this. Department of Homeland security is not needed at all and we should go back to CIA and FBI running the security of this Nation, they have done a better job then Homeland Security ever did and I think the money saved should go to CIA and FBI, Coast Guard and National Guard because they should be securing our border right now ! I will stop for now but this is just the tip ! CONGRESS SHOULD BE DOING THERE JOBS OR LETS SEND THEM ALL HOME.

    • podunk1

      Well written and to the point. Problem is… we’re ASKING criminals to charge and convict themselves! They happen to be oath bound before and the present time in which they continue to NOT ONLY ENFORCE the Constitution and laws thereunder, they continue to mock and defy it in order to overthrow it!

      Why aren’t they in jail without bond, charged with acts plus aiding and abetting enemies of the Constitution and country. They definitely include Johnson, Holder, and Obama!

    • Busterak1

      Well put Podunk ! I don’t know how the President has been able to get so many to go along with his democracy destroying actions but you better believe he is giving away something we hold very dear and his many acts of Treason have been unchallenged by Congress leading me to the conclusion that our current Congressional system must be overhauled in such a way as to give the American people a way to stop them all if necessary. They (congress) operate like this is their own business and all assets belong to them personally. Time to put an end to their reign but it is difficult when people expect everyone else to do the job for them. It will take and effort by all to bring about change and throw out current congressional members who think their job is all about catering to Special Interest. THE PEOPLE RUN THIS COUNTRY AND IT IS ABOUT TIME WE PROVE IT !

      • Ace Dragon


        • Busterak1

          Hell you are spot on Ace Dragon. I believe you are exactly right and many people have their heads in the sand and don’t even know that History repeats itself and what happened back in 1776 is about to happen again and I am beginning to believe that is what it will take to win back our country and to expel all the illegal aliens. The government and the liberals are going to try and force us into something we don’t want to do and take from us great wealth.

    • Michael

      Amen! This whole fiasco of Obama and his Muslim cronies need to be treated just like the criminals they are. The very reason we have been seeing the lack of respect for our country and the criminal acts from people working in the government is they look to the leader of the country and see nothing but a complete disregard for OUR laws.

  • Mike N

    What difference does it make if BO breaks the law or judges order since no one will do anything. It is time to impeach him. Even though the Dems won’t vote him out of office. Impeachment will be a blot on his record and will hopefully slow him down. This man is dangerous.

    • rmagnano

      I agree with you, impeachment would make a blot on his record. Do know of Bill Clinton, Wasn’t he impeached? Though he wasn’t thrown out of office. The blot on his record surely didn’t bother his record. This Half-breed from another planet is like a mirage, Everything passes through without touching any vital organs.

      • Mike N

        Bill Clinton was impeached by the House, but it takes 2/3 of the Senate to have a President removed from Office. Unfortunately the Democrats don’t have the integrity to vote against one of their own.

        • podunk1

          Read Amendment 14 Section 3, 4, & 5. A minimum charge would be both insurrection and rebellion… either one is cause for banning a person under oath from ANY office within the USA! It doesn’t state a 2/3 majority is required to ban office nor does it contain the word “impeach”. It does require 2/3 majority to remove the ban.
          The violation reads “…shall have engaged in insurrection “or” rebellion against the same (“oath”), or given aid or comfort to enemies thereof (oath/duty)! (The felony crimes committed to harbor, aid, abet, and obstruct Constitution and law to protect and encourage the illegal invasion of America are literally endless by Obama, Holder, Johnson, and their loyal subordinates! It’s the highest crime to violate, and should be enforced by immediate highly securely restricted incarceration NOW!

          • Mike N

            I stand by what I said. This is the procedure:

            The Articles of Impeachment are received from the House.

            The Senate formulates rules and procedures for holding a trial.

            A trial will be held. The President will be represented by his lawyers. A select group of House members will serve as “prosecutors.” The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (currently John G. Roberts) will preside with all 100 Senators acting as the jury.

            The Senate will meet in private session to debate a verdict.

            The Senate, in open session, will vote on a verdict. A 2/3 vote of the Senate will result in a conviction.

            The Senate will vote to remove the President from office.

            The Senate may also vote (by a simple majority) to prohibit the President from holding any public office in the future.

          • podunk1

            You’re correct on impeachment, and that’s where the traitors are hiding with aid and abetment by Democrats and RINOs who will not defend the Constitution against progressives within congress.
            The 14th sections 3, 4, & 5 are separate Supreme laws that are not related to impeachment by text or reference in any way.
            14-4 reads “No person shall be a senator or representative in congress, or elector of president and vice-president, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States… (“No person shall… hold any office” includes everyone in government because all are required to take oath to obtain office!)

            The continuation of text “…shall have engaged in insurrection OR rebellion against same (the Constitution), or given aid or comfort to the enemies (Constitution is the subject). That is the test for banning anyone who violates oath duty (first and second, etc.) after taking oath. The bar is as simple as engagement! Intent, motive, ignorance, or mistake are not relevant!

            The last sentence deals with powers to “remove such disability”. There is no super majority requirement stipulated, period!

Google Analytics Alternative