(National Sentinel)Â Conflicted: Because the presidents who nominate them are political, federal judges who are appointed to the bench are political as well, which is why our country gets so many rulings from courts that conflict — or appear to conflict — with U.S. law.
We got another one on Monday: A federal judge in California, appointed to the bench by President Obama, ruled that POTUS Donald Trump hasÂ no authority to issue an executive order changing asylum rules that are clearly being abused by hordes of migrants.
The Associated Press reported:
…U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar agreed with legal groups that immediately sued, arguing that U.S. immigration law clearly allows someone to seek asylum even if they enter the country between official ports of entry and temporarily barred the ruling from going into place while the case is heard.
â€œWhatever the scope of the Presidentâ€™s authority, he may not rewrite the immigration laws to impose a condition that Congress has expressly forbidden,â€ said Tigar, a nominee of former President Barack Obama.
Except, of course, whenÂ Obama changed immigration law by claiming authority to stop the deportation process for so-called “Dreamers.”
Regarding the “scope” of POTUS Trump’s authority, the president issued his order under the guise ofÂ national security and as such it isÂ not reviewable by a federal court. Tigar overstepped his bounds and very clearly when he chose to rule on such matters.
It was the same when Left-wing judicial activists in the 9th Circuit struck down POTUS Trump’s executive orders banning travel to the U.S. from certain countries known to be harbors of terrorism, and the Supreme Court eventually upheld his authority because it is enshrined in U.S. law.
While Tigar may be technically correct in terms of how he is interpretingÂ one law, there are at least two others — the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1954, duly passed by Congress and signed into law, and the National Emergency Act — that authorize POTUS Trump to issue his asylum order.
Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 states: â€œWhenever the President finds that the entry ofÂ any aliens or of anyÂ class of aliensÂ into the United StatesÂ would be detrimental to theÂ interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for suchÂ period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens orÂ any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on theÂ entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriateÂ [emphasis added].â€
As to a president’s authority under existing national security provisions, in the 1970s Congress passed theÂ National Emergencies Act, which attempted to define at least some of the president’s authorities to respond to unorthodox and potentially dangerous situations as he deems necessary.
TheÂ United States CodeÂ (Title 42, Chapter 68, Subchapter I, Â§5122), definesÂ emergencyÂ as follows:
“EmergencyÂ means any occasion or instance for which, in the determination of the President, Federal assistance is needed to supplement State and local efforts and capabilities to save lives and to protect property and public health and safety, or to lessen or avert the threat of a catastrophe in any part of the United States.”
Duhaime’s Law Dictionary further describes a national emergency as: “A situation beyond the ordinary which threatens the health or safety of citizens and which cannot be properly addressed by the use of other law.”
If thousands of migrants arriving at our southwestern border, many with intent to break our immigration laws by entering our country illegally, perhaps en masse, does not constitution an “occasion” that threatens to endanger “property, public health, and safety” of Americans, then nothing does.
POTUS Trump and his advisers are right again, as usual, and another politicized federal judge isÂ wrong because he’s cherry-picking statutory law while ignoring the president’s broad Article II powers under the Constitution and other existing laws to protect and defend the borders of our country.
Granted, Article III in the Constitution gives federal courts the authority to interpret the Constitution and whether federal laws or executive actions fall within the Constitution’s limitations. But it also requires federal judges to swear an allegiance to the Constitution and faithfully uphold it; clearly, in the eyes of constitutionalists, Tigar is not.
There is also this: Federal courts have no mechanisms in place to actuallyÂ enforce their decisions. They can issue rulings but the Executive Branch has to ensure the decisions are carried out.
What if POTUS Trump simply refuses to carry out Tigar’s order? Well, the Left would scream bloody murder and claim such an actionÂ proves President Trump is a “tyrant.”
Really? So when Obama ignored the Constitution to change immigration laws for so-called “Dreamers,” that wasn’t tyrannical or illegal?
And how about all of the Left-wing cities that are currentlyÂ ignoring federal courts and federal immigration laws by creating “sanctuaries” for illegal aliens? Or by passing laws legalizing the recreational use of marijuana though it remains a violation ofÂ federalÂ drug laws?
The Left hasÂ no moral case to make here because the Left has been ignoring federal courts and U.S. law for years.
If POTUS Trump wants to stick toÂ his pledge to uphold the Constitution while faithfully executing allÂ ofÂ the laws of our country, he should ignore this federal court ruling he knows is a violation of that oath, as he attempts to protect our country under national emergency statutes.
Never miss a story! Sign up for our daily email newsletter â€”Â Click here!